ML13004A005

Kld TR-531, Final Report, Rev. 1, Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Development of Evacuation Time Estimates

ML13004A005
Person / Time
Site:	Calvert Cliffs
Issue date:	11/30/2012
From:	KLD Engineering, PC
To:	Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, EDF Group
References
KLD TR-531, Rev 1
Download: ML13004A005 (413)

Text

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Development of Evacuation Time Estimates Work performed for Constellation Energy, by:

KLD Engineering, P.C.

43 Corporate Drive Hauppauge, NY 11788 mailto:kweinisch@kldcompanies.com November 2012 Final Report, Rev. 1 KLD TR - 531

Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 11 1.1 Overview of the ETE Process...................................................................................................... 11 1.2 The Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Location........................................................................ 13 1.3 Preliminary Activities ................................................................................................................. 15 1.4 Comparison with Prior ETE Study .............................................................................................. 19 2 STUDY ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS............................................................................................. 21 2.1 Data Estimates ........................................................................................................................... 21 2.2 Study Methodological Assumptions .......................................................................................... 22 2.3 Study Assumptions ..................................................................................................................... 25 3 DEMAND ESTIMATION ....................................................................................................................... 31 3.1 Permanent Residents ................................................................................................................. 32 3.2 Shadow Population .................................................................................................................... 37 3.3 Transient Population ................................................................................................................ 310 3.4 Seasonal Transient Population................................................................................................. 310 3.5 Employees ................................................................................................................................ 314 3.6 Medical Facilities ...................................................................................................................... 317 3.7 Total Demand in Addition to Permanent Population .............................................................. 317 3.8 Special Events........................................................................................................................... 317 3.9 Summary of Demand ............................................................................................................... 318 4 ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY................................................................................................ 41 4.1 Capacity Estimations on Approaches to Intersections .............................................................. 42 4.2 Capacity Estimation along Sections of Highway ........................................................................ 44 4.3 Application to the CCNPP Study Area ........................................................................................ 46 4.3.1 TwoLane Roads ................................................................................................................. 46 4.3.2 MultiLane Highway ........................................................................................................... 46 4.3.3 Intersections ...................................................................................................................... 47 4.4 Simulation and Capacity Estimation .......................................................................................... 47 5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME .......................................................................................... 51 5.1 Background ................................................................................................................................ 51 5.2 Fundamental Considerations ..................................................................................................... 53 5.3 Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5 ................................................... 56 5.4 Calculation of Trip Generation Time Distribution .................................................................... 512 5.4.1 Statistical Outliers ............................................................................................................ 513 5.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation ................................................................................. 517 5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas ................................................. 518 6 DEMAND ESTIMATION FOR EVACUATION SCENARIOS ..................................................................... 61 7 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE) .......................................................... 71 7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation ......................................................................... 71 7.2 Staged Evacuation ...................................................................................................................... 71 7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation ..................................................................... 72 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant i KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

7.4 Evacuation Rates ........................................................................................................................ 73 7.5 Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) Results .................................................................................... 74 7.6 Staged Evacuation Results ......................................................................................................... 76 7.7 Guidance on Using ETE Tables ................................................................................................... 76 8 TRANSITDEPENDENT AND SPECIAL FACILITY EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES ................................. 81 8.1 Transit Dependent People Demand Estimate ............................................................................ 82 8.2 School Population - Transit Demand ......................................................................................... 84 8.3 Medical Facility Demand ............................................................................................................ 84 8.4 Evacuation Time Estimates for Transit Dependent People ....................................................... 85 8.5 Special Needs Population......................................................................................................... 810 9 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGY ................................................................................................... 91 10 EVACUATION ROUTES .................................................................................................................. 101 11 SURVEILLANCE OF EVACUATION OPERATIONS ........................................................................... 111 12 CONFIRMATION TIME .................................................................................................................. 121 List of Appendices A. GLOSSARY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TERMS .................................................................................. A1 B. DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION MODEL ......................................................... B1 C. DYNEV TRAFFIC SIMULATION MODEL ............................................................................................... C1 C.1 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. C5 C.1.1 The Fundamental Diagram ................................................................................................. C5 C.1.2 The Simulation Model ........................................................................................................ C5 C.1.3 Lane Assignment .............................................................................................................. C13 C.2 Implementation ....................................................................................................................... C13 C.2.1 Computational Procedure ................................................................................................ C13 C.2.2 Interfacing with Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTRAD) ................................................... C16 D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE .............................................................................. D1 E. SPECIAL FACILITY DATA ...................................................................................................................... E1 F. TELEPHONE SURVEY ........................................................................................................................... F1 F.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... F1 F.2 Survey Instrument and Sampling Plan ....................................................................................... F2 F.3 Survey Results ............................................................................................................................ F3 F.3.1 Household Demographic Results ........................................................................................... F3 F.3.2 Evacuation Response ............................................................................................................. F7 F.3.3 Time Distribution Results ....................................................................................................... F9 F.4 Conclusions .............................................................................................................................. F12 G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN .......................................................................................................... G1 G.1 Traffic and Access Control Points .............................................................................................. G1 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

H EVACUATION REGIONS ..................................................................................................................... H1 J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM ..................................... J1 K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK .................................................................................................. K1 L. ZONE BOUNDARIES ............................................................................................................................ L1 M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES ............................................................................................. M1 M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times ............................................................................ M1 M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate ................. M2 M.3 Effect of Changes in EPZ Resident Population ......................................................................... M3 M.4 Zone 1 and Zone 3 Evacuating both North and South ............................................................. M5 M.5 Contraflow South over the Thomas Johnson Bridge ............................................................... M6 M.6 Contraflow North on MD Route 2/4 ........................................................................................ M7 M.7 MD 235 Prohibited for Evacuees from Zone 3 ......................................................................... M8 N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST ................................................................................................................... N1 Note: Appendix I intentionally skipped Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant iii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

List of Figures Figure 11. CCNPP Location ....................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 12. CCNPP LinkNode Analysis Network ....................................................................................... 17 Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ....................................................................................... 24 Figure 31. CCNPP EPZ ............................................................................................................................... 33 Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector ............................................................................. 35 Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................. 36 Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector ................................................................................................. 38 Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector ..................................................................................................... 39 Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector............................................................................................. 312 Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................................. 313 Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector ............................................................................................ 315 Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector ................................................................................................ 316 Figure 41. Fundamental Diagrams ............................................................................................................ 48 Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip .............................................................. 55 Figure 52. Evacuation Mobilization Activities ........................................................................................ 511 Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution....................................................... 515 Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions....................................................................... 521 Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile Region ........................................................................................................................................... 523 Figure 61. CCNPP EPZ Zones .................................................................................................................... 64 Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology ..................................................................................... 714 Figure 72. CCNPP Shadow Region .......................................................................................................... 715 Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate .................................... 716 Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate........................ 717 Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate .......................................... 718 Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate .......................................... 719 Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 7 Hours, 55 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ...................... 720 Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 8 Hours, 35 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate ...................... 721 Figure 79. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 1 for Region R03 ...................................................... 722 Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R03 .................................................... 722 Figure 711. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 3 for Region R03 .................................................... 723 Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R03 .................................................... 723 Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R03 .................................................... 724 Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R03 .................................................... 724 Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R03 .................................................... 725 Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R03 .................................................... 725 Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R03 .................................................... 726 Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R03 .................................................. 726 Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R03 .................................................. 727 Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R03 .................................................. 727 Figure 721. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 13 for Region R03 .................................................. 728 Figure 722. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 14 for Region R03 .................................................. 728 Figure 723. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 15 for Region R03 ................................................... 729 Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations ...................................................................... 812 Figure 82. TransitDependent Bus Routes ............................................................................................. 813 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant iv KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 101. General Population and Host Schools ................................................................................ 102 Figure 102. Major Evacuation Routes .................................................................................................... 103 Figure B1. Flow Diagram of SimulationDTRAD Interface........................................................................ B5 Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network ........................................................................................... C4 Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams ........................................................................................................... C6 Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 .............................................................................. C7 Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3) .................................................... C15 Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities ..................................................................................................... D5 Figure E1. Schools within the EPZ .......................................................................................................... E10 Figure E2. Preschools & Daycares within the EPZ.................................................................................. E11 Figure E3. Medical Facilities within the EPZ .......................................................................................... E12 Figure E4. Major Employers within the EPZ ........................................................................................... E13 Figure E5. Recreational Areas within the EPZ ........................................................................................ E14 Figure E6. Marinas within the EPZ ......................................................................................................... E15 Figure E7. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ ........................................................................................... E16 Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ ....................................................................................................... F3 Figure F2. Household Vehicle Availability ................................................................................................ F4 Figure F3. Vehicle Availability 1 to 5 Person Households ...................................................................... F5 Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 6 to 9+ Person Households .................................................................... F5 Figure F5. Commuters in Households in the EPZ ..................................................................................... F6 Figure F6. Modes of Travel in the EPZ ..................................................................................................... F7 Figure F7. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation ............................................................................... F8 Figure F8. Households Evacuating with Pets ........................................................................................... F8 Figure F9. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/School .................................................................. F9 Figure F10. Work to Home Travel Time ................................................................................................. F10 Figure F11. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation................................................................................ F11 Figure F12. Time to Clear Driveway of 6"8" of Snow ........................................................................... F12 Figure G1. Traffic/Access Control Points for the CCNPP Site .................................................................. G2 Figure G2. Intersection of MD 235 and MD 4 ......................................................................................... G3 Figure H1. Region R01 ............................................................................................................................. H3 Figure H2. Region R02 ............................................................................................................................. H4 Figure H3. Region R03 ............................................................................................................................. H5 Figure H4. Region R04.............................................................................................................................. H6 Figure H5. Region R05.............................................................................................................................. H7 Figure H6. Region R06.............................................................................................................................. H8 Figure H7. Region R07.............................................................................................................................. H9 Figure H8. Region R08............................................................................................................................ H10 Figure H9. Region R09............................................................................................................................ H11 Figure H10. Region R10.......................................................................................................................... H12 Figure H11. Region R11.......................................................................................................................... H13 Figure H12. Region R12.......................................................................................................................... H14 Figure H13. Region R13.......................................................................................................................... H15 Figure H14. Region R14.......................................................................................................................... H16 Figure H15. Region R15.......................................................................................................................... H17 Figure H16. Region R16.......................................................................................................................... H18 Figure H17. Region R17.......................................................................................................................... H19 Figure J1. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1) .............. J8 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant v KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2) ............................... J8 Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3).............. J9 Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4) .............................. J9 Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5) ..................................................................................................................... J10 Figure J6. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6) .............. J10 Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7) ............................... J11 Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Snow (Scenario 8) ............................. J11 Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 9) .............. J12 Figure J10. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 10) ........................... J12 Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Snow (Scenario 11) ......................... J13 Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12) ................................................................................................................... J13 Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather, Airshow (Scenario 13) .............................................................................................................................. J14 Figure J14. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, New Plant (Scenario 14) ........................................................................................................................... J14 Figure J15. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact ...................................................................................................................................... J15 Figure K1. CCNPP LinkNode Analysis Network ...................................................................................... K2 Figure K2. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 ..................................................................................... K3 Figure K3. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 ..................................................................................... K4 Figure K4. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 ..................................................................................... K5 Figure K5. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 ..................................................................................... K6 Figure K6. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 ..................................................................................... K7 Figure K7. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 ..................................................................................... K8 Figure K8. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 ..................................................................................... K9 Figure K9. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 ................................................................................... K10 Figure K10. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 ................................................................................. K11 Figure K11. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 ............................................................................... K12 Figure K12. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 ............................................................................... K13 Figure K13. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 ............................................................................... K14 Figure K14. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 ............................................................................... K15 Figure K15. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 ............................................................................... K16 Figure K16. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 ............................................................................... K17 Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 ............................................................................... K18 Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 ............................................................................... K19 Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 ............................................................................... K20 Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 ............................................................................... K21 Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 ............................................................................... K22 Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 ............................................................................... K23 Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 ............................................................................... K24 Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 ............................................................................... K25 Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 ............................................................................... K26 Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 ............................................................................... K27 Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 ............................................................................... K28 Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 ............................................................................... K29 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant vi KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 ............................................................................... K30 Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 ............................................................................... K31 Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 ............................................................................... K32 Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 ............................................................................... K33 Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 ............................................................................... K34 Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 ............................................................................... K35 Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 ............................................................................... K36 Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 ............................................................................... K37 Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 ............................................................................... K38 Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 ............................................................................... K39 Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 ............................................................................... K40 Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 ............................................................................... K41 Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 ............................................................................... K42 Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 ............................................................................... K43 Figure K43. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 42 ............................................................................... K44 Figure K44. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 43 ............................................................................... K45 Figure K45. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 44 ............................................................................... K46 Figure K46. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 45 ............................................................................... K47 Figure K47. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 46 ............................................................................... K48 Figure K48. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 47 ............................................................................... K49 Figure K49. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 48 ............................................................................... K50 Figure K50. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 49 ............................................................................... K51 Figure K51. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 50 ............................................................................... K52 Figure K52. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 51 ............................................................................... K53 Figure K53. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 52 ............................................................................... K54 Figure K54. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 53 ............................................................................... K55 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant vii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

List of Tables Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction ........................................................................................................... 11 Table 12. Highway Characteristics ........................................................................................................... 15 Table 13. ETE Study Comparisons ............................................................................................................ 19 Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 23 Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather................................................................................. 27 Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population ....................................................................................... 34 Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Zone ........................................................... 34 Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector ............................................................................. 37 Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles ..................................................................... 311 Table 35. Summary of NonEPZ Resident Employees and Employee Vehicles...................................... 314 Table 37. Summary of Population Demand ........................................................................................... 319 Table 38. Summary of Vehicle Demand ................................................................................................. 320 Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities ................................................................................ 53 Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public ............................................................................... 56 Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work ................................................... 57 Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home .................................................................. 58 Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate ....................................................... 59 Table 56. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6"8" of Snow ...................................................... 510 Table 57. Mapping Distributions to Events ............................................................................................ 512 Table 58. Description of the Distributions ............................................................................................. 513 Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation ..................... 520 Table 510. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation ....................... 522 Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions........................................................................................... 63 Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions............................................................................................... 65 Table 63. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios ............................................ 66 Table 64. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario.................................................................................................. 67 Table 71. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population ........................... 79 Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population ....................... 710 Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region ............................ 711 Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region .......................... 712 Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions......................................................................................... 713 Table 81. TransitDependent Population Estimates .............................................................................. 814 Table 82. School and Daycare Population Demand Estimates .............................................................. 815 Table 83. Host Schools ........................................................................................................................... 816 Table 84. Medical Facility Transit Demand ............................................................................................ 817 Table 85. Summary of Transportation Resources .................................................................................. 818 Table 86. Bus Route Descriptions .......................................................................................................... 819 Table 87. School Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather .............................................................. 821 Table 88. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain .............................................................................. 822 Table 89. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Snow ............................................................................ 823 Table 810. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes ........................................................................ 824 Table 811. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ........................................ 825 Table 812. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Rain ......................................................... 826 Table 813. Transit Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates Snow ....................................................... 827 Table 814. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather ............................................. 828 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant viii KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 815. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Rain .............................................................. 829 Table 816. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Snow ............................................................ 830 Table 817. Homebound Special Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates .................................... 831 Table 121. Estimated Number of Telephone Calls Required for Confirmation of Evacuation .............. 122 Table A1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms .................................................................................... A1 Table C1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II ........................................................ C2 Table C2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model ........................................................................... C3 Table C3. Glossary ....................................................................................................................................C8 Table E1. Schools within the EPZ ............................................................................................................. E2 Table E2. Preschools and Daycares within the EPZ ................................................................................. E3 Table E3. Medical Facilities within the EPZ .............................................................................................. E4 Table E4. Major Employers within the EPZ .............................................................................................. E5 Table E5. Recreational Attractions within the EPZ .................................................................................. E7 Table E6. Marinas within the EPZ ............................................................................................................ E8 Table E7. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ .............................................................................................. E9 Table F1. CCNPP Telephone Survey Sampling Plan ................................................................................. F2 Table H1. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Regions .............................................................. H2 Table J1. Characteristics of the Ten Highest Volume Signalized Intersections........................................ J2 Table J2. Sample Simulation Model Input ............................................................................................... J4 Table J3. Selected Model Outputs for the Evacuation of the Entire EPZ Scenarios (Region R03) ........... J5 Table J4. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes (Region R03, Scenario 1) ................................................................................................................................................. J6 Table J5. Simulation Model Outputs at Network Exit Links for Region R03, Scenario 1 ......................... J7 Table K1. Evacuation Roadway Network Characteristics ...................................................................... K56 Table K2. Nodes in the LinkNode Analysis Network which are Controlled ........................................... K96 Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study ....................................... M1 Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study .................................................... M2 Table M3. ETE Variation with Population Change ................................................................................. M4 Table M4. ETE Variation with Increase in NB Evacuation ...................................................................... M5 Table M5. Impact on ETE of SB Contraflow ........................................................................................... M6 Table M6. Impact on ETE of NB Contraflow .......................................................................................... M7 Table M7. Impact on ETE with MD 235 Prohibited................................................................................ M8 Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist ................................................................................................. N1 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ix KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

This report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to develop Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant (CCNPP) located in Calvert County, Maryland. ETE are part of the required planning basis and provide Constellation (CENG) and State and local governments with sitespecific information needed for Protective Action decisionmaking.

In the performance of this effort, guidance is provided by documents published by Federal Governmental agencies. Most important of these are:

Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies, NUREG/CR7002, November 2011.

Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG0654/FEMAREP1, Rev. 1, November 1980.

Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG/CR6863, January 2005.

10CFR50, Appendix E - Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production and Utilization Facilities Overview of Project Activities This project began in March, 2012 and extended over a period of 7 months. The major activities performed are briefly described in chronological sequence:

Attended kickoff meetings with CENG personnel and emergency management personnel representing state and county governments.

Accessed U.S. Census Bureau data files for the year 2010. Studied Geographical Information Systems (GIS) maps of the area in the vicinity of the CCNPP, then conducted a detailed field survey of the highway network.

Synthesized this information to create an analysis network representing the highway system topology and capacities within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ), plus a Shadow Region covering the region between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15 miles radially from the plant.

Designed and sponsored a telephone survey of residents within the EPZ to gather focused data needed for this ETE study that were not contained within the census database. The survey instrument was reviewed and modified by the licensee and offsite response organization (ORO) personnel prior to the survey.

Data collection forms (provided to the OROs at the kickoff meeting) were returned with data pertaining to employment, transients, and special facilities in each county.

Telephone calls to specific facilities supplemented the data provided.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

The traffic demand and tripgeneration rates of evacuating vehicles were estimated from the gathered data. The trip generation rates reflected the estimated mobilization time (i.e., the time required by evacuees to prepare for the evacuation trip) computed using the results of the telephone survey of EPZ residents.

Following federal guidelines, the EPZ is subdivided into 8 Zones. These zones are then grouped within circular areas or keyhole configurations (circles plus radial sectors) that define a total of 17 Evacuation Regions.

The timevarying external circumstances are represented as Evacuation Scenarios, each described in terms of the following factors: (1) Season (Summer, Winter); (2) Day of Week (Midweek, Weekend); (3) Time of Day (Midday, Evening); and (4) Weather (Good, Rain, Snow). There were two special event scenarios considered for this study - The Naval Air Station Patuxent River Air Show & New Plant Construction. One roadway impact scenario was considered wherein the Thomas Johnson Bridge was closed for the duration of the evacuation.

Staged evacuation was considered for those regions wherein the 2 mile radius and sectors downwind to 5 miles were evacuated.

As per NUREG/CR7002, the Planning Basis for the calculation of ETE is:

A rapidly escalating accident at the CCNPP that quickly assumes the status of General Emergency such that the Advisory to Evacuate is virtually coincident with the siren alert, and no early protective actions have been implemented.

While an unlikely accident scenario, this planning basis will yield ETE, measured as the elapsed time from the Advisory to Evacuate until the stated percentage of the population exits the impacted Region, that represent upper bound estimates. This conservative Planning Basis is applicable for all initiating events.

If the emergency occurs while schools are in session, the ETE study assumes that the children will be evacuated by bus directly to reception centers or host schools located outside the EPZ. Parents, relatives, and neighbors are advised to not pick up their children at school prior to the arrival of the buses dispatched for that purpose. The ETE for schoolchildren are calculated separately.

Evacuees who do not have access to a private vehicle will either rideshare with relatives, friends or neighbors, or be evacuated by buses provided as specified in the county evacuation plans. Those in special facilities will likewise be evacuated with public transit, as needed: bus, van, or ambulance, as required. Separate ETE are calculated for the transitdependent evacuees, for homebound special needs population, and for those evacuated from special facilities.

Computation of ETE A total of 255 ETE were computed for the evacuation of the general public. Each ETE quantifies the aggregate evacuation time estimated for the population within one of the 17 Evacuation Regions to evacuate from that Region, under the circumstances defined for one of the 15 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Evacuation Scenarios (17 x 15 = 255). Separate ETE are calculated for transitdependent evacuees, including schoolchildren for applicable scenarios.

Except for Region R03, which is the evacuation of the entire EPZ, only a portion of the people within the EPZ would be advised to evacuate. That is, the Advisory to Evacuate applies only to those people occupying the specified impacted region. It is assumed that 100 percent of the people within the impacted region will evacuate in response to this Advisory. The people occupying the remainder of the EPZ outside the impacted region may be advised to take shelter.

The computation of ETE assumes that 20% of the population within the EPZ but outside the impacted region, will elect to voluntarily evacuate. In addition, 20% of the population in the Shadow Region will also elect to evacuate. These voluntary evacuees could impede those who are evacuating from within the impacted region. The impedance that could be caused by voluntary evacuees is considered in the computation of ETE for the impacted region.

Staged evacuation is considered wherein those people within the 2mile region evacuate immediately, while those beyond 2 miles, but within the EPZ, shelterinplace. Once 90% of the 2mile region is evacuated, those people beyond 2 miles begin to evacuate. As per federal guidance, 20% of people beyond 2 miles will evacuate (noncompliance) even though they are advised to shelterinplace.

The computational procedure is outlined as follows:

A linknode representation of the highway network is coded. Each link represents a unidirectional length of highway; each node usually represents an intersection or merge point. The capacity of each link is estimated based on the field survey observations and on established traffic engineering procedures.

The evacuation trips are generated at locations called zonal centroids located within the EPZ and Shadow Region. The trip generation rates vary over time reflecting the mobilization process, and from one location (centroid) to another depending on population density and on whether a centroid is within, or outside, the impacted area.

The evacuation model computes the routing patterns for evacuating vehicles that are compliant with federal guidelines (outbound relative to the location of the plant), then simulate the traffic flow movements over space and time. This simulation process estimates the rate that traffic flow exits the impacted region.

The ETE statistics provide the elapsed times for 90 percent and 100 percent, respectively, of the population within the impacted region, to evacuate from within the impacted region. These statistics are presented in tabular and graphical formats. The 90th percentile ETE have been identified as the values that should be considered when making protective action decisions because the 100th percentile ETE are prolonged by those relatively few people who take longer to mobilize. This is referred to as the evacuation tail in Section 4.0 of NUREG/CR7002.

The use of a public outreach (information) program to emphasize the need for evacuees to minimize the time needed to prepare to evacuate (secure the home, assemble needed clothes, medicines, etc.) should also be considered.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Traffic Management This study references the traffic management information provided by Dorchester, Calvert and St. Marys Counties, and identifies critical intersections.

Selected Results A compilation of selected information is presented on the following pages in the form of figures and tables extracted from the body of the report; these are described below.

Figure 61 displays a map of the CCNPP EPZ showing the layout of the 8 Zones that comprise, in aggregate, the EPZ.

Table 31 presents the estimates of permanent resident population in each zone based on the 2010 Census data.

Table 61 defines each of the 17 Evacuation Regions in terms of their respective groups of zones.

Table 62 lists the Evacuation Scenarios.

Tables 71 and 72 are compilations of ETE. These data are the times needed to clear the indicated regions of 90 and 100 percent of the population occupying these regions, respectively. These computed ETE include consideration of mobilization time and of estimated voluntary evacuations from other regions within the EPZ and from the Shadow Region.

Tables 73 and 74 present ETE for the 2mile region for unstaged and staged evacuations for the 90th and 100th percentiles, respectively.

Table 87 presents ETE for the schoolchildren in good weather.

Table 811 presents ETE for the transitdependent population in good weather.

Figure H8 presents an example of an Evacuation Region (Region R08) to be evacuated under the circumstances defined in Table 61. Maps of all regions are provided in Appendix H.

Conclusions General population ETE were computed for 255 unique cases - a combination of 17 unique Evacuation Regions and 15 unique Evacuation Scenarios. Table 71 and Table 72 document these ETE for the 90th and 100th percentiles. These ETE range from 1:25 (hr:min) to 9:35 at the 90th percentile.

Inspection of Table 71 and Table 72 indicates that the ETE for the 100th percentile are significantly longer than those for the 90th percentile. This is the result of the congestion within the EPZ. When the system becomes congested, traffic exits the EPZ at rates somewhat below capacity until some evacuation routes have cleared. As more routes clear, the aggregate rate of egress slows since many vehicles have already left the EPZ.

Towards the end of the process, relatively few evacuation routes service the remaining demand. See Figures 79 through 723.

Inspection of Table 73 and Table 74 indicates that a staged evacuation provides no benefits to evacuees from within the 2 mile region and unnecessarily delays the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

evacuation of those beyond 2 miles (compare Regions R02, R05 and R06 with Regions R16, R15 and 17, respectively, in Tables 71 and 72). See Section 7.6 for additional discussion.

Comparison of Scenarios 3 and 13 in Table 71 indicates that the Special Event - Naval Air Station Patuxent River Air Show - has a significant impact on the ETE for the 90th percentile. See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 (summer, midweek, midday) and 14 (summer, midweek, midday, plant construction) in Table 72 indicates that the new plant construction special event does not materially affect the ETE. See Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 15 in Table 71 indicates that the roadway closure -

closure of the Thomas Johnson Bridge decreases the 90th percentile ETE for evacuation regions which include Zone 3. This is because it forces people to evacuate northwards and thus avoid the bottleneck at the bridge. This alternate routing brings evacuees within 2 miles of the CCNPP, which depending on the condition of the reactor, may be dangerous. Section 7.5 for additional discussion.

Separate ETE were computed for schools, medical facilities, transitdependent persons, and homebound special needs. The average singlewave ETE for these facilities are within a similar range as the general population ETE at the 90th percentile except for those routes that avoid travelling south over the Thomas Johnson Bridge. See Section 8.

Table 85 indicates that there are enough buses and wheelchair accessible buses available to evacuate the transitdependent population within the EPZ in a single wave; however, there are not enough ambulances to evacuate the bedridden population in a single wave.

The general population ETE at the 90th percentile is insensitive to reductions in the base trip generation time of 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> due to the severe traffic congestion within the EPZ. See Table M1.

The general population ETE is insensitive to the voluntary evacuation of vehicles in the Shadow Region. See Table M2. This is due to the fact that congestion within Zone 3 is the overriding factor in determining the ETE.

Population changes between +/-7% result in ETE changes which meet the criteria for updating ETE between decennial Censuses. See Section M.3.

The ETE are reduced by up to 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> and 40 minutes if Zone 3 is evacuated both to the north and south. Although occupants of Zone 3 are predirected (through public information) to evacuate to the south, if it is safe to travel through the 2mile ring, evacuation travel time can be greatly reduced. ETE for this alternative are presented in Table M4.

Contraflow over the Thomas Johnson Bridge can be a valuable congestion mitigation measure, for the base case of all of Zone 3 and some of Zone 1 evacuees being routed to the south (because it is unsafe to pass within two miles of the plant). A three and a half mile stretch of contraflow reduced the 90th and 100th percentile ETE for the full EPZ by1:35 and 2:00, respectively - see Section M.5.Contraflow northbound on MD 2/4 would be labor and equipment intensive and provides only a small benefit.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 61. CCNPP EPZ Zones Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Zone 2000 Population 2010 Population 1 5,250 5,777 2 4,081 4,928 3 17,069 19,752 4 4,139 5,396 5 2,283 2,793 6 4,246 4,635 7 7,770 9,109 8 295 262 TOTAL 45,133 52,652 EPZ Population Growth: 16.66%

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions Zone Region Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R01 2Mile Radius x R02 5Mile Radius x x x R03 Full EPZ x x x x x x x x R04 Dorchester County x Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to 5 Miles Zone Region Wind Direction From: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R05 NW, NNW, N, NNE x x N/A NE Refer to Region R02 R06 ENE, E, ESE, SE, SSE x x S, SSW, SW, WSW, W, N/A WNW Refer to Region R01 Evacuate 5Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R07 N x x x x R08 NNE, NE x x x x x R09 ENE x x x x x x R10 E x x x x x R11 ESE x x x x x x R12 SE, SSE x x x x x R13 S x x x x R14 SW, WSW, W, WNW x x x x N/A SSW, NW, NNW Refer to Region R02 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Zone Region Wind Direction From: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R15 NW, NNW, N, NNE x x R16 NE, x x x R17 ENE, E, ESE, SE, SSE x x S, SSW, SW, WSW,W, N/A WNW Refer to Region R01 ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) then Evacuate Evacuate Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenarios Season Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter1 Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Evening Good None Weekend The Naval Air Station 13 Summer Weekend Midday Good Patuxent River Air Show New Plant 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Construction Roadway Impact Closure of the 15 Summer Midweek Midday Good Thomas Johnson Bridge 1

Winter assumes that school is in session (also applies to spring and autumn). Summer assumes that school is not in session.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 71. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good New Roadway Rain Rain Rain Snow Rain Snow Airshow Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Plant Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 2:20 2:25 2:10 2:20 2:05 2:20 2:25 3:00 2:10 2:20 2:50 2:05 1:30 2:10 2:30 R02 7:00 7:55 7:45 8:35 6:25 6:40 7:20 8:20 6:40 7:20 8:15 6:10 3:15 7:00 5:20 R03 6:20 7:05 6:55 7:50 5:40 6:05 6:40 7:15 6:00 6:30 7:20 5:35 9:30 6:15 5:35 Dorchester County R04 2:25 2:30 2:00 2:00 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:15 2:10 2:10 2:45 2:20 1:25 2:25 2:25 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R05 7:20 7:55 8:00 8:50 6:35 6:50 7:35 8:35 6:50 7:35 8:35 6:25 3:20 7:10 5:10 R06 2:25 2:30 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:25 2:30 3:05 2:10 2:15 2:50 2:10 1:35 2:35 2:45 5Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R07 6:50 7:35 7:25 8:20 6:10 6:35 7:20 7:50 6:25 7:00 7:55 6:00 9:35 6:50 5:05 R08 6:45 7:30 7:15 8:00 6:00 6:25 7:05 7:40 6:15 6:50 7:45 5:55 9:35 6:30 5:00 R09 6:30 7:10 7:00 8:00 5:50 6:10 6:50 7:25 6:05 6:40 7:30 5:40 9:30 6:20 5:25 R10 7:00 7:35 7:40 8:20 6:15 6:40 7:15 8:15 6:35 7:15 8:10 6:05 9:00 6:55 5:35 R11 6:55 7:40 7:30 8:15 6:15 6:35 7:10 8:05 6:35 7:10 8:05 6:00 9:05 6:50 5:40 R12 6:40 7:35 7:30 8:15 6:05 6:25 7:05 7:55 6:25 7:00 7:55 5:55 3:10 6:40 5:55 R13 7:00 7:45 7:40 8:25 6:15 6:35 7:15 8:10 6:30 7:15 8:10 6:05 3:15 6:55 5:25 R14 7:00 7:55 7:45 8:30 6:20 6:40 7:20 8:20 6:40 7:20 8:15 6:10 3:10 7:00 5:20 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R15 7:10 7:50 7:50 8:30 6:40 6:45 7:45 8:20 6:50 7:40 8:40 6:40 3:10 6:55 5:25 R16 6:55 7:40 7:40 8:30 6:30 6:35 7:30 8:05 6:45 7:30 8:25 6:30 3:10 6:45 5:20 R17 3:10 3:10 3:00 3:05 3:05 3:10 3:10 3:50 3:00 3:10 3:45 3:05 2:00 2:55 3:25 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good New Roadway Rain Rain Rain Snow Rain Snow Airshow Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Plant Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 R02 8:30 9:25 9:15 10:05 7:35 8:00 8:45 9:55 7:55 8:45 9:50 7:25 5:05 8:35 6:10 R03 8:55 9:50 9:30 10:35 7:55 8:30 9:20 10:15 8:15 9:00 10:10 7:45 12:25 8:55 6:55 Dorchester County R04 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:15 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R05 8:30 9:15 9:15 10:05 7:35 8:00 8:45 9:55 7:55 8:45 9:50 7:25 5:05 8:30 6:00 R06 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:10 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R07 8:45 9:45 9:25 10:25 7:50 8:25 9:20 10:10 8:10 8:55 10:05 7:40 12:15 8:55 6:10 R08 8:55 9:50 9:30 10:25 7:55 8:30 9:20 10:15 8:10 9:00 10:10 7:45 12:25 8:55 6:10 R09 8:55 9:50 9:30 10:35 7:55 8:30 9:20 10:15 8:10 9:00 10:10 7:45 12:25 8:55 6:45 R10 8:45 9:25 9:30 10:20 7:50 8:15 9:05 10:15 8:10 9:00 10:10 7:40 12:10 8:50 6:45 R11 8:45 9:45 9:25 10:20 7:50 8:20 9:05 10:15 8:15 9:00 10:10 7:35 12:15 8:50 6:45 R12 8:20 9:30 9:15 10:10 7:40 8:00 8:50 9:55 8:00 8:45 9:55 7:25 5:10 8:35 6:40 R13 8:30 9:25 9:15 10:10 7:35 8:00 8:50 9:55 7:55 8:45 9:55 7:25 5:10 8:35 6:15 R14 8:20 9:25 9:15 10:05 7:35 8:00 8:45 9:55 7:55 8:45 9:50 7:25 5:10 8:35 6:10 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R15 8:15 9:05 9:05 9:50 7:40 7:50 8:55 9:35 7:50 8:50 9:55 7:40 5:05 8:15 6:20 R16 8:15 9:05 9:05 10:00 7:40 7:50 8:55 9:35 8:00 8:50 9:55 7:40 5:05 8:15 6:20 R17 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:15 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good New Roadway Rain Rain Rain Snow Rain Snow Airshow Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Plant Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2 and 5Mile Regions R01 2:20 2:25 2:10 2:20 2:05 2:20 2:25 3:00 2:10 2:20 2:50 2:05 1:30 2:10 2:30 R02 3:05 3:15 3:25 3:55 2:45 3:00 3:05 3:35 2:45 3:00 3:25 2:30 1:30 2:50 5:15 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R05 2:55 3:20 3:30 3:55 2:40 3:00 3:05 3:35 2:50 3:05 3:30 2:30 1:30 2:45 5:10 R06 2:20 2:25 2:05 2:15 2:05 2:20 2:25 3:00 2:05 2:20 2:50 2:05 1:30 2:15 2:35 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles, 5mile Region (R16)

R15 3:40 3:55 3:45 4:00 3:40 3:40 4:00 4:25 3:45 3:55 4:30 3:50 1:55 3:35 5:25 R16 3:45 3:50 3:45 3:50 3:35 3:35 3:55 4:20 3:40 3:45 4:25 3:35 1:55 3:30 5:25 R17 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 3:15 2:35 2:35 3:15 2:35 1:50 2:30 3:00 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good New Roadway Rain Rain Rain Snow Rain Snow Airshow Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Plant Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2 and 5Mile Regions R01 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 R02 5:05 5:10 5:05 5:15 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:30 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:05 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R05 5:05 5:20 5:05 5:40 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:10 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:00 R06 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles, 5mile Region (R16)

R15 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:25 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:55 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 R16 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:40 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:15 R17 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 87. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather Travel Time Driver Dist. To Average Travel Time Dist. EPZ from EPZ ETE to Mobilization Loading EPZ Bdry Speed to EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to Bdry to H.S. H.S.

School Time (min) Time (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) H.S. (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

CALVERT COUNTY SCHOOLS Appeal Elementary School 90 15 16.9 7.4 136 4:05 60.3 72 5:15 Dowell Elementary School 90 15 15.0 12.1 74 3:00 62.3 75 4:15 Dowell Elementary School Before &

90 15 15.0 12.1 74 3:00 62.3 75 4:15 After School Program Grover's Place Day Care 90 15 6.8 13.9 29 2:15 9.9 12 2:30 Mill Creek Middle School 90 15 15.9 7.8 122 3:50 60.2 72 5:00 Mutual Elementary School 90 15 6.8 7.4 55 2:40 2.0 2 2:45 Mutual Elementary School Before &

90 15 6.8 7.4 55 2:40 2.0 2 2:45 After School Program Our Lady Star of the Sea School 90 15 13.9 19.2 44 2:30 58.0 70 3:40 Our Lady Star of the Sea School (ASC) 90 15 13.9 19.2 44 2:30 58.0 70 3:40 Patuxent Elementary School Before &

90 15 16.9 7.4 137 4:05 58.1 70 5:15 After School Program Patuxent Elementary School 90 15 16.9 7.4 137 4:05 58.1 70 5:15 Patuxent Head Start 90 15 16.9 7.4 137 4:05 58.1 70 5:15 Patuxent High School 90 15 16.4 7.9 125 3:50 52.3 63 4:55 Solomon's Day Care Center 90 15 14.3 15.1 57 2:45 53.8 65 3:50 Southern Middle School 90 15 12.2 7.5 98 3:25 55.4 66 4:30 St. Leonard Elementary School Before 90 15 8.0 17.1 28 2:15 14.5 17 2:30

& After School Program St. Leonard Elementary School 90 15 8.0 17.1 28 2:15 14.5 17 2:30 St. Paul's Preschool 90 15 17.7 7.9 134 4:00 55.5 67 5:10 ST. MARY'S COUNTY SCHOOLS Esperanza Middle School 90 15 2.6 42.8 4 1:50 6.7 8 2:00 Green Holly Elementary School 90 15 3.3 40.4 5 1:50 15.1 18 2:10 Hollywood Elementary School 90 15 7.3 17.1 26 2:15 5.4 7 2:20 St John's Elementary School 90 15 3.0 32.8 5 1:50 4.6 5 1:55 Town Creek Elementary School 90 15 2.9 43.7 4 1:50 6.7 8 2:00 Maximum for EPZ: 4:05 Maximum: 5:15 Average for EPZ: 2:55 Average: 3:40 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 811. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates - Good Weather OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Bus Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number Number (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 1 1, 2 90 22.4 21.8 62 30 3:05 6.1 7 5 10 61 30 5:00 2 1, 2 90 18.0 24.5 44 30 2:45 6.1 7 5 10 51 30 4:30 3 1 90 15.9 18.8 51 30 2:55 6.1 7 5 10 45 30 4:35 4 1, 2 90 33.9 17.0 120 30 4:00 6.1 7 5 10 89 30 6:25 5 1 90 21.5 4.7 275 30 6:35 70.9 85 5 10 137 30 11:05 6 1, 2 90 22.1 3.7 361 30 8:05 70.9 85 5 10 138 30 12:35 7 1, 2 90 23.4 3.8 372 30 8:15 70.9 85 5 10 141 30 12:50 8 1, 2 90 19.0 3.4 339 30 7:40 70.9 85 5 10 131 30 12:05 9 1, 2 90 22.5 4.8 282 30 6:45 70.9 85 5 10 139 30 11:15 10 1 90 19.2 4.5 257 30 6:20 70.9 85 5 10 131 30 10:45 11 1 90 12.9 3.9 197 30 5:20 70.9 85 5 10 116 30 9:30 12 1 90 22.0 4.7 280 30 6:40 70.9 85 5 10 138 30 11:10 13 1 90 34.4 17.1 121 30 4:05 6.1 7 5 10 90 30 6:30 14 1 90 19.5 22.1 53 30 2:55 6.1 7 5 10 58 30 4:50 15 1 90 23.1 13.5 102 30 3:45 6.1 7 5 10 63 30 5:45 16 1 90 7.5 22.2 20 30 2:20 6.1 7 5 10 33 30 3:50 17 1 90 12.7 23.8 32 30 2:35 6.1 7 5 10 45 30 4:15 18 1,2,3 120 6.9 50.0 8 30 2:40 4.0 5 5 10 21 30 3:55 1,2,3 120 9.5 28.6 20 30 2:50 4.0 5 5 10 28 30 4:10 19 4,5,6 130 9.5 33.5 17 30 3:00 4.0 5 5 10 29 30 4:20 Maximum ETE: 8:15 Maximum ETE: 12:50 Average ETE: 4:40 Average ETE: 7:30 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H8. Region R08 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ES16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

1 INTRODUCTION This report describes the analyses undertaken and the results obtained by a study to develop Evacuation Time Estimates (ETE) for the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant (CCNPP), located in Calvert County, Maryland. ETE provide State and local governments with sitespecific information needed for Protective Action decisionmaking.

In the performance of this effort, guidance is provided by documents published by Federal Governmental agencies. Most important of these are:

• Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies, NUREG/CR7002, November 2011.

• Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG 0654/FEMA REP 1, Rev. 1, November 1980.

• Analysis of Techniques for Estimating Evacuation Times for Emergency Planning Zones, NUREG/CR 1745, November 1980.

• Development of Evacuation Time Estimates for Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG/CR 6863, January 2005.

The work effort reported herein was supported and guided by local stakeholders who contributed suggestions, critiques, and the local knowledge base required. Table 11 presents a summary of stakeholders and interactions.

Table 11. Stakeholder Interaction Stakeholder Nature of Stakeholder Interaction Meetings to define data requirements and set up Constellation Energy (CENG) contacts with local government agencies Calvert County Division of Emergency Meetings to define data requirements Management & Safety, St Marys Emergency Services, and Dorchester County Emergency Management Agency Meeting to define data requirements and explain Calvert Highway Patrol and Maryland State Police project scope Meeting to define data requirements and explain Calvert County Technology Services GIS project scope 1.1 Overview of the ETE Process The following outline presents a brief description of the work effort in chronological sequence:

1. Information Gathering:

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

a. Defined the scope of work in discussions with representatives from CENG.

b. Attended meetings and held conference call with emergency planners from Calvert, Dorchester and St Marys Counties to identify issues to be addressed and resources available.

c. Conducted a detailed field survey of the highway system and of area traffic conditions within the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) and Shadow Region.

d. Obtained demographic data from the 2010 census.

e. Conducted a random sample telephone survey of EPZ residents.

f. Conducted a data collection effort to identify and describe schools, special facilities, major employers, transportation providers, and other important information.

2. Estimated distributions of Trip Generation times representing the time required by various population groups (permanent residents, employees, and transients) to prepare (mobilize) for the evacuation trip. These estimates are primarily based upon the random sample telephone survey.

3. Defined Evacuation Scenarios. These scenarios reflect the variation in demand, in trip generation distribution and in highway capacities, associated with different seasons, day of week, time of day and weather conditions.

4. Reviewed the existing traffic management plan to be implemented by local and state police in the event of an incident at the plant. Traffic control is applied at specified Traffic Control Points (TCP) located within the EPZ.

5. Used existing zones to define Evacuation Regions. The EPZ is partitioned into 8 Zones along jurisdictional and geographic boundaries. Regions are groups of contiguous zones for which ETE are calculated. The configurations of these Regions reflect wind direction and the radial extent of the impacted area. Each Region, other than those that approximate circular areas, approximates a keyhole section within the EPZ as recommended by NUREG/CR7002.

6. Estimated demand for transit services for persons at Special Facilities and for transit dependent persons at home.

7. Prepared the input streams for the DYNEV II system.

a. Estimated the evacuation traffic demand, based on the available information derived from Census data, and from data provided by local and state agencies, Constellation and from the telephone survey.

b. Applied the procedures specified in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM1) to the data acquired during the field survey, to estimate the capacity of all 1

Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2010), Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 2010.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

highway segments comprising the evacuation routes.

c. Developed the linknode representation of the evacuation network, which is used as the basis for the computer analysis that calculates the ETE.

d. Calculated the evacuating traffic demand for each Region and for each Scenario.

e. Specified selected candidate destinations for each origin (location of each source where evacuation trips are generated over the mobilization time) to support evacuation travel consistent with outbound movement relative to the location of the CCNPP.

8. Executed the DYNEV II model to determine optimal evacuation routing and compute ETE for all residents, transients and employees (general population) with access to private vehicles. Generated a complete set of ETE for all specified Regions and Scenarios.

9. Documented ETE in formats in accordance with NUREG/CR7002.

10. Calculated the ETE for all transit activities including those for special facilities (schools, medical facilities, etc.), for the transitdependent population and for homebound special needs population.

1.2 The Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Location The Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant is located in Lusby, MD approximately 50 miles southeast of Washington, DC. The EPZ consists of parts of three counties: Calvert County, St. Marys County and Dorchester County. Figure 11 displays the area surrounding the CCNPP. This map identifies the communities in the area and the major roads.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 11. CCNPP Location Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

1.3 Preliminary Activities These activities are described below.

Field Surveys of the Highway Network KLD personnel drove the entire highway system within the EPZ and the Shadow Region which consists of the area between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15 miles radially from the plant. The characteristics of each section of highway were recorded. These characteristics are shown in Table 12:

Table 12. Highway Characteristics Number of lanes Posted speed Lane width Actual free speed Shoulder type & width Abutting land use Interchange geometries Control devices Lane channelization & queuing Intersection configuration (including capacity (including turn bays/lanes) roundabouts where applicable)

Geometrics: curves, grades (>4%) Traffic signal type Unusual characteristics: Narrow bridges, sharp curves, poor pavement, flood warning signs, inadequate delineations, toll booths, etc.

Video and audio recording equipment were used to capture a permanent record of the highway infrastructure. No attempt was made to meticulously measure such attributes as lane width and shoulder width; estimates of these measures based on visual observation and recorded images were considered appropriate for the purpose of estimating the capacity of highway sections. For example, Exhibit 157 in the HCM indicates that a reduction in lane width from 12 feet (the base value) to 10 feet can reduce free flow speed (FFS) by 1.1 mph - not a material difference - for twolane highways. Exhibit 1530 in the HCM shows little sensitivity for the estimates of Service Volumes at Level of Service (LOS) E (near capacity), with respect to FFS, for twolane highways.

The data from the audio and video recordings were used to create detailed geographical information systems (GIS) shapefiles and databases of the roadway characteristics and of the traffic control devices observed during the road survey; this information was referenced while preparing the input stream for the DYNEV II System.

As documented on page 155 of the HCM 2010, the capacity of a twolane highway is 1700 passenger cars per hour in one direction. For freeway sections, a value of 2250 vehicles per hour per lane is assigned, as per Exhibit 1117 of the HCM 2010. The road survey has identified several segments which are characterized by adverse geometrics on twolane highways which are reflected in reduced values for both capacity and speed. These estimates are consistent with the service volumes for LOS E presented in HCM Exhibit 1530. These links may be Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

identified by reviewing Appendix K. Link capacity is an input to DYNEV II which computes the ETE. Further discussion of roadway capacity is provided in Section 4 of this report.

Traffic signals are either pretimed (signal timings are fixed over time and do not change with the traffic volume on competing approaches), or are actuated (signal timings vary over time based on the changing traffic volumes on competing approaches). Actuated signals require detectors to provide the traffic data used by the signal controller to adjust the signal timings.

These detectors are typically magnetic loops in the roadway, or video cameras mounted on the signal masts and pointed toward the intersection approaches. If detectors were observed on the approaches to a signalized intersection during the road survey, detailed signal timings were not collected as the timings vary with traffic volume. TCPs at locations which have control devices are represented as actuated signals in the DYNEV II system.

If no detectors were observed, the signal control at the intersection was considered pretimed, and detailed signal timings were gathered for several signal cycles. These signal timings were input to the DYNEV II system used to compute ETE, as per NUREG/CR7002 guidance.

Figure 12 presents the linknode analysis network that was constructed to model the evacuation roadway network in the EPZ and Shadow Region. The directional arrows on the links and the node numbers have been removed from Figure 12 to clarify the figure. The detailed figures provided in Appendix K depict the analysis network with directional arrows shown and node numbers provided. The observations made during the field survey were used to calibrate the analysis network.

Telephone Survey A telephone survey was undertaken to gather information needed for the evacuation study.

Appendix F presents the survey instrument, the procedures used and tabulations of data compiled from the survey returns.

These data were utilized to develop estimates of vehicle occupancy to estimate the number of evacuating vehicles during an evacuation and to estimate elements of the mobilization process.

This database was also referenced to estimate the number of transitdependent residents.

Computing the Evacuation Time Estimates The overall study procedure is outlined in Appendix D. Demographic data were obtained from several sources, as detailed later in this report. These data were analyzed and converted into vehicle demand data. The vehicle demand was loaded onto appropriate source links of the analysis network using GIS mapping software. The DYNEV II system was then used to compute ETE for all Regions and Scenarios.

Analytical Tools The DYNEV II System that was employed for this study is comprised of several integrated computer models. One of these is the DYNEV (DYnamic Network EVacuation) macroscopic simulation model, a new version of the IDYNEV model that was developed by KLD under contract with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 12. CCNPP LinkNode Analysis Network Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

DYNEV II consists of four submodels:

A macroscopic traffic simulation model (for details, see Appendix C).

A Trip Distribution (TD), model that assigns a set of candidate destination (D) nodes for each origin (O) located within the analysis network, where evacuation trips are generated over time. This establishes a set of OD tables.

A Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA), model which assigns trips to paths of travel (routes) which satisfy the OD tables, over time. The TD and DTA models are integrated to form the DTRAD (Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution) model, as described in Appendix B.

A Myopic Traffic Diversion model which diverts traffic to avoid intense, local congestion, if possible.

Another software product developed by KLD, named UNITES (UNIfied Transportation Engineering System) was used to expedite data entry and to automate the production of output tables.

The dynamics of traffic flow over the network are graphically animated using the software product, EVAN (EVacuation ANimator), developed by KLD. EVAN is GIS based, and displays statistics such as LOS, vehicles discharged, average speed, and percent of vehicles evacuated, output by the DYNEV II System. The use of a GIS framework enables the user to zoom in on areas of congestion and query road name, town name and other geographical information.

The procedure for applying the DYNEV II System within the framework of developing ETE is outlined in Appendix D. Appendix A is a glossary of terms.

For the reader interested in an evaluation of the original model, IDYNEV, the following references are suggested:

NUREG/CR4873 - Benchmark Study of the IDYNEV Evacuation Time Estimate Computer Code.

NUREG/CR4874 - The Sensitivity of Evacuation Time Estimates to Changes in Input Parameters for the IDYNEV Computer Code.

The evacuation analysis procedures are based upon the need to:

Route traffic along paths of travel that will expedite their travel from their respective points of origin to points outside the EPZ.

Restrict movement toward the plant to the extent practicable, and disperse traffic demand so as to avoid focusing demand on a limited number of highways.

Move traffic in directions that are generally outbound, relative to the location of the CCNPP.

DYNEV II provides a detailed description of traffic operations on the evacuation network. This description enables the analyst to identify bottlenecks and to develop countermeasures that are designed to represent the behavioral responses of evacuees. The effects of these Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

countermeasures may then be tested with the model.

1.4 Comparison with Prior ETE Study Table 13 presents a comparison of the present ETE study with the 2008 (and subsequent revisions in 2010 and 2011). The major factors contributing to the differences between the ETE values obtained in this study and those of the previous study can be summarized as follows:

Changes which cause an increase in the ETE o Routing of base cases follow official emergency route direction (with sensitivities to consider alternatives).

Changes which cause a decrease in ETE o A decrease in permanent resident population (2008 estimate vs. 2010 Census).

o Voluntary and shadow evacuations are decreased.

o The highway representation is more detailed and has been updated.

o Dynamic evacuation modeling.

Table 13. ETE Study Comparisons Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study ArcGIS Software using 2000 US Census blocks; block centroid method ArcGIS Software using 2010 US Census Resident Population used; population extrapolated to blocks; area ratio method used.

Basis 2008. Population = 52,652 Population = 55,205 Vehicle occupancy based upon Vehicle occupancy based upon telephone survey, Average household telephone survey, Average household size within EPZ = 2.80 Resident Population size within EPZ = 2.80 person/household person/household and 1.46 Vehicle Occupancy and 1.46 vehicles/evacuating household, vehicles/evacuating household, resulting in average vehicle occupancy of resulting in average vehicle 1.92 person/vehicle occupancy of 1.92 person/vehicle.

Employee estimates based on information provided about major Employee estimates based on employers in EPZ and on data information provided about major Employee provided by Census JourneytoWork employers in EPZ. 1.03 employees per Population questionnaires. 1.03 vehicle based on telephone survey employees/vehicle based on phone results.

survey results. Employees = 2,485 Employees = 1,454 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study Estimates based upon U.S. Census data and the results of the telephone survey.

Defined as households with 0 vehicles +

Defined as households with 0 households with 1 vehicle with vehicles + households with 1 vehicle commuters who do not return home +

with commuters who do not return households with 2 vehicles with home + households with 2 vehicles commuters who do not return home. A TransitDependent with commuters who do not return total of 947 people who do not have Population home. Telephone survey results used access to a vehicle, requiring 33 buses to in the estimation of transit evacuate (for at least 1 bus per route).

dependent population. Total of 980 An additional 24 homebound special people needing 33 buses to evacuate. needs persons needed special transportation to evacuate (22 required a wheelchairaccessible vehicle, and 2 required an ambulance).

Transient estimates based upon Transient estimates based on information provided by the counties, information from past report, county supplemented with web searches and Transient and local tourism websites and phone calls to individual facilities and Population county agencies. observations of the facilities during the Transients = 10,678 road survey.

Transients = 13,190 Special facility population based on Special facility population based on information provided by each county information provided by each county Special Facilities within the EPZ. within the EPZ.

Population Special Facility Population = 103 Current census = 206 Vehicles originating at special Wheelchair Accessible Bus Required = 66 facilities = 5 buses, 2 wheelchair vans Ambulances Required = 5 School population based on information provided by each county School population based on information within the EPZ School enrollment = provided by each county within the EPZ.

School Population 8,453 School enrollment = 7,732 Vehicles originating at schools = 147 Buses required = 168 buses (294 pce)

Voluntary 50 percent of population within the evacuation from radius being evacuated; 35 percent, 20 percent of the population within the within EPZ in areas in annular ring between the radius EPZ, but not within the Evacuation outside region to be being evacuated and the EPZ Region (see Figure 21) evacuated boundary 20% of people outside of the EPZ within 30% of people outside of the EPZ the Shadow Region Shadow Evacuation within the shadow area (see Figure 72)

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 110 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study Network Size 574 links; 422 nodes 711 links; 531 nodes Field surveys conducted in 2006 and Field surveys conducted in March 2012.

Roadway Geometric 2008. Major intersections were Roads and intersections were video Data video archived. Road capacities based archived.

on 2000 HCM. Road capacities based on 2010 HCM.

Direct evacuation to designated Direct evacuation to designated School Evacuation Reception Center/Host School. Reception Center/Host School.

50 percent of transitdependent 50 percent of transitdependent persons Ridesharing persons will evacuate with a neighbor will evacuate with a neighbor or friend.

or friend Based on residential telephone survey of specific pretrip Based on residential telephone survey of mobilization activities: specific pretrip mobilization activities:

Residents with commuters returning Residents with commuters returning leave between 30 and 240 minutes. leave between 15 and 300 minutes.

Trip Generation for Residents without commuters Residents without commuters returning Evacuation returning leave between 15 and 180 leave between 5 and 210 minutes.

minutes. Employees and transients leave between Employees and transients leave 5 and 135 minutes.

between 15 and 120 minutes. All times measured from the Advisory to All times measured from the Advisory Evacuate.

to Evacuate.

Normal, Rain, or Snow. The capacity Normal, Rain, or Snow. The capacity and and free flow speed of all links in the free flow speed of all links in the Weather network are reduced by 10% in the network are reduced by 10% in the event of rain and 20% for snow. event of rain and 20% for snow.

IDYNEV System: TRAD and PC-Modeling DYNEV II System - Version 4.0.11.0 DYNEV 2 Special Events - New Plant 2 Special Events - New Plant Construction, Air Show at the Naval Base Special Events Construction, Air Show at the Naval Airshow additional vehicles = 35,715 Base Construction additional vehicles =2,350 14 Regions (central sector wind 17 Regions (central sector wind direction direction and each adjacent sector and each adjacent sector technique Evacuation Cases technique used) and 14 Scenarios used) and 15 Scenarios producing 255 producing 196 unique cases unique cases.

ETE reported for the 50th, 90th, 95th ETE reported for 90th and 100th Evacuation Time and 100th percentile population.

percentile population. Results presented Estimates Reporting Results presented by Region and by Region and Scenario.

Scenario.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 111 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Topic Previous ETE Study Current ETE Study Summer Weekend, Midday, Good Summer Weekend Midday Good Weather: 6:55 weather = 4:35 Evacuation Time Summer Weekday, Midday, Good Summer Weekday, Midday, Good Weather: 6:20 Estimates for the Weather: 4:30 entire EPZ, 90th Winter, Weekday, Midday, Good percentile Winter Weekday Midday Good Weather: 6:05, weather = 4:30 Winter Weekday, midday, Snow: 7:15 Winter Weekday, midday, Snow: 5:40 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 112 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

2 STUDY ESTIMATES AND ASSUMPTIONS This section presents the estimates and assumptions utilized in the development of the evacuation time estimates.

2.1 Data Estimates

1. Population estimates are based upon Census 2010 data.

2. Estimates of employees who reside outside the EPZ and commute to work within the EPZ are based upon data obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau and surveys of major employers in the EPZ.

3. Population estimates at special facilities are based on available data from county emergency management offices and from phone calls to specific facilities.

4. Roadway capacity estimates are based on field surveys and the application of the Highway Capacity Manual 2010.

5. Population mobilization times are based on a statistical analysis of data acquired from a random sample telephone survey of EPZ residents (see Section 5 and Appendix F).

6. The relationship between resident population and evacuating vehicles is developed from the telephone survey. Average values of 2.80 persons per household and 1.46 evacuating vehicles per household are used. The relationship between persons and vehicles for transients and employees is as follows:

a. Employees: 1.03 employees per vehicle (telephone survey results) for all major employers.

b. Parks: Vehicle occupancy varies based upon data gathered from local transient facilities.

c. Special Events:

i. Naval Air Station Patuxent River Air Show Assumed population attending travel as families/households in a single vehicle, and used the average household size of 2.80 persons to estimate the number of vehicles.

ii. New Plant Construction - Employee occupancy per vehicle for construction workers of 1.3 was used, based on the information gathered for the previous CCNPP ETE Study Report (Revision 3, March 2011). Also from the previous study, for the additional new employees, an occupancy of 1.05 employees per vehicle was used.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

2.2 Study Methodological Assumptions

1. ETE are presented for the evacuation of the 90th and 100th percentiles of population for each Region and for each Scenario. The percentile ETE is defined as the elapsed time from the Advisory to Evacuate issued to a specific Region of the EPZ, to the time that Region is clear of the indicated percentile of evacuees. A Region is defined as a group of zones that is issued an Advisory to Evacuate. A scenario is a combination of circumstances, including time of day, day of week, season, and weather conditions.

2. The ETE are computed and presented in tabular format and graphically, in a format compliant with NUREG/CR7002.

3. Evacuation movements (paths of travel) are generally outbound relative to the plant to the extent permitted by the highway network. All major evacuation routes are used in the analysis.

4. Regions are defined by the underlying keyhole or circular configurations as specified in Section 1.4 of NUREG/CR7002. These Regions, as defined, display irregular boundaries reflecting the geography of the zones included within these underlying configurations.

5. As indicated in Figure 22 of NUREG/CR7002, 100% of people within the impacted keyhole evacuate. 20% of those people within the EPZ, not within the impacted keyhole, will voluntarily evacuate. 20% of those people within the Shadow Region will voluntarily evacuate. See Figure 21 for a graphical representation of these evacuation percentages. Sensitivity studies explore the effect on ETE of increasing the percentage of voluntary evacuees in the Shadow Region (see Appendix M).

6. A total of 15 Scenarios representing different temporal variations (season, time of day, day of week) and weather conditions are considered. These Scenarios are outlined in Table 21.

7. Scenario 15 considers the closure of the Thomas Johnson Bridge.

8. The models of the IDYNEV System were recognized as state of the art by the Atomic Safety & Licensing Board (ASLB) in past hearings. (Sources: Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Hearings on Seabrook and Shoreham; Urbanik1). The models have continuously been refined and extended since those hearings and were independently validated by a consultant retained by the NRC. The new DYNEV II model incorporates the latest technology in traffic simulation and in dynamic traffic assignment.

1 Urbanik, T., et. al. Benchmark Study of the IDYNEV Evacuation Time Estimate Computer Code, NUREG/CR4873, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, June, 1988.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 21. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenarios Season Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Evening Good None Weekend The Naval Air Station 13 Summer Weekend Midday Good Patuxent River Air Show New Plant 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Construction Roadway Impact 15 Summer Midweek Midday Good Closure of the Thomas Johnson Bridge Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 21. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

2.3 Study Assumptions

1. The Planning Basis Assumption for the calculation of ETE is a rapidly escalating accident that requires evacuation, and includes the following:

a. Advisory to Evacuate is announced coincident with the siren notification.

b. Mobilization of the general population will commence within 15 minutes after siren notification.

c. ETE are measured relative to the Advisory to Evacuate.

2. It is assumed that everyone within the group of zones forming a Region that is issued an Advisory to Evacuate will, in fact, respond and evacuate in general accord with the planned routes.

3. 65 percent of the households in the EPZ have at least 1 commuter; 58 percent of those households with commuters will await the return of a commuter before beginning their evacuation trip, based on the telephone survey results. Therefore 38 percent (65% x 58% = 38%) of EPZ households will await the return of a commuter, prior to beginning their evacuation trip.

4. Access Control Points (ACP) will divert traffic attempting to enter the EPZ.

5. Traffic Control Points (TCP) within the EPZ will be staffed over time, beginning at the Advisory to Evacuate. Their number and location will depend on the Region to be evacuated and resources available. The objectives of these TCP are:

a. Facilitate the movements of all (mostly evacuating) vehicles at the location.

b. Discourage inadvertent vehicle movements towards the plant.

c. Provide assurance and guidance to any traveler who is unsure of the appropriate actions or routing.

d. Act as local surveillance and communications center.

e. Provide information to the emergency operations center (EOC) as needed, based on direct observation or on information provided by travelers.

In calculating ETE, it is assumed that evacuees will drive safely, travel in directions identified in the plan, and obey all control devices and traffic guides.

6. Buses will be used to transport those without access to private vehicles:

a. If schools are in session, transport (buses) will evacuate students directly to the designated host schools.

b. It is assumed parents will pick up children at day care centers prior to evacuation.

c. Buses and ambulances will evacuate patients at medical facilities and at any senior facilities within the EPZ, as needed.

d. Transitdependent general population will be evacuated to Reception Centers.

e. Schoolchildren, if school is in session, are given priority in assigning transit vehicles.

f. Bus mobilization time is considered in ETE calculations.

g. Analysis of the number of required roundtrips (waves) of evacuating transit vehicles is presented.

h. Transport of transitdependent evacuees from reception centers to masscare Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

centers is not considered in this study.

7. Provisions are made for evacuating the transitdependent portion of the general population to reception centers by bus, based on the assumption that some of these people will rideshare with family, neighbors, and friends, thus reducing the demand for buses. We assume that the percentage of people who rideshare is 50 percent. This assumption is based upon reported experience for other emergencies2, and on guidance in Section 2.2 of NUREG/CR7002.

8. Two types of adverse weather scenarios are considered. Rain may occur for either winter or summer scenarios; snow occurs in winter scenarios only. It is assumed that the rain or snow begins earlier or at about the same time the evacuation advisory is issued.

No weatherrelated reduction in the number of transients who may be present in the EPZ is assumed. It is assumed that roads are passable and that the appropriate agencies are plowing the roads as they would normally when snowing.

Adverse weather scenarios affect roadway capacity and the free flow highway speeds.

The factors applied for the ETE study are based on recent research on the effects of weather on roadway operations3; the factors are shown in Table 22.

2 Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Toronto, THE MISSISSAUGA EVACUATION FINAL REPORT, June 1981. The report indicates that 6,600 people of a transitdependent population of 8,600 people shared rides with other residents; a ride share rate of 76% (Page 510).

3 Agarwal, M. et. Al. Impacts of Weather on Urban Freeway Traffic Flow Characteristics and Facility Capacity, Proceedings of the 2005 MidContinent Transportation Research Symposium, August, 2005. The results of this paper are included as Exhibit 1015 in the HCM 2010.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

9. School buses used to transport students are assumed to transport 70 students per bus for elementary schools and 50 students per bus for middle and high schools, based on discussions with county offices of emergency management. Transit buses used to transport the transitdependent general population are assumed to transport 30 people per bus.

Table 22. Model Adjustment for Adverse Weather Highway Free Flow Scenario Capacity* Speed* Mobilization Time for General Population Rain 90% 90% No Effect Clear driveway before leaving home Snow 80% 80%

(See Figure F12)

• Adverse weather capacity and speed values are given as a percentage of good weather conditions. Roads are assumed to be passable.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

3 DEMAND ESTIMATION The estimates of demand, expressed in terms of people and vehicles, constitute a critical element in developing an evacuation plan. These estimates consist of three components:

1. An estimate of population within the EPZ, stratified into groups (resident, employee, transient).

2. An estimate, for each population group, of mean occupancy per evacuating vehicle. This estimate is used to determine the number of evacuating vehicles.

3. An estimate of potential doublecounting of vehicles.

Appendix E presents much of the source material for the population estimates. Our primary source of population data, the 2010 Census, however, is not adequate for directly estimating some transient groups.

Throughout the year, vacationers and tourists enter the EPZ. These nonresidents may dwell within the EPZ for a short period (e.g. a few days or one or two weeks), or may enter and leave within one day. Estimates of the size of these population components must be obtained, so that the associated number of evacuating vehicles can be ascertained.

The potential for doublecounting people and vehicles must be addressed. For example:

A resident who works and shops within the EPZ could be counted as a resident, again as an employee and once again as a shopper.

A visitor who stays at a hotel and spends time at a park, then goes shopping could be counted three times.

Furthermore, the number of vehicles at a location depends on time of day. For example, motel parking lots may be full at dawn and empty at noon. Similarly, parking lots at area parks, which are full at noon, may be almost empty at dawn. Estimating counts of vehicles by simply adding up the capacities of different types of parking facilities will tend to overestimate the number of transients and can lead to ETE that are too conservative.

Analysis of the population characteristics of the CCNPP EPZ indicates the need to identify three distinct groups:

Permanent residents people who are year round residents of the EPZ.

Transients people who reside outside of the EPZ who enter the area for a specific purpose (shopping, recreation) and then leave the area.

Employees people who reside outside of the EPZ and commute to businesses within the EPZ on a daily basis.

Estimates of the population and number of evacuating vehicles for each of the population groups are presented for each Zone and by polar coordinate representation (population rose).

The CCNPP EPZ is subdivided into 8 Zones. The EPZ is shown in Figure 31.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

3.1 Permanent Residents The primary source for estimating permanent population is the latest U.S. Census data. The average household size (2.80 persons/household - See Figure F1) and the number of evacuating vehicles per household (1.46 vehicles/household - See Figure F7) were adapted from the telephone survey results.

Population estimates are based upon Census 2010 data. The estimates are created by cutting the census block polygons by the Zone and EPZ boundaries. A ratio of the original area of each census block and the updated area (after cutting) is multiplied by the total block population to estimate what the population is within the EPZ. This methodology assumes that the population is evenly distributed across a census block. Table 31 provides the permanent resident population within the EPZ, by Zone based on this methodology.

The year 2010 permanent resident population is divided by the average household size and then multiplied by the average number of evacuating vehicles per household in order to estimate number of vehicles. Permanent resident population and vehicle estimates are presented in Table 32. Figure 32 and Figure 33 present the permanent resident population and permanent resident vehicle estimates by sector and distance from CCNPP. This rose was constructed using GIS software.

It can be argued that this estimate of permanent residents overstates, somewhat, the number of evacuating vehicles, especially during the summer. It is certainly reasonable to assert that some portion of the population would be on vacation during the summer and would travel elsewhere. A rough estimate of this reduction can be obtained as follows:

Assume 50 percent of all households vacation for a twoweek period over the summer.

Assume these vacations, in aggregate, are uniformly dispersed over 10 weeks, i.e. 10 percent of the population is on vacation during each twoweek interval.

Assume half of these vacationers leave the area.

On this basis, the permanent resident population would be reduced by 5 percent in the summer and by a lesser amount in the offseason. Given the uncertainty in this estimate, we elected to apply no reductions in permanent resident population for the summer scenarios to account for residents who may be out of the area.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 31. CCNPP EPZ Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 31. EPZ Permanent Resident Population Zone 2000 Population 2010 Population 1 5,250 5,777 2 4,081 4,928 3 17,069 19,752 4 4,139 5,396 5 2,283 2,793 6 4,246 4,635 7 7,770 9,109 8 295 262 TOTAL 45,133 52,652 EPZ Population Growth: 16.66%

Table 32. Permanent Resident Population and Vehicles by Zone 2010 Zone 2010 Population Resident Vehicles 1 5,777 3,016 2 4,928 2,585 3 19,752 10,310 4 5,396 2,823 5 2,793 1,461 6 4,635 2,419 7 9,109 4,753 8 262 141 TOTAL 52,652 27,508 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 32. Permanent Resident Population by Sector Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 33. Permanent Resident Vehicles by Sector Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

3.2 Shadow Population A portion of the population living outside the evacuation area extending to 15 miles radially from the CCNPP (in the Shadow Region) may elect to evacuate without having been instructed to do so. Based upon NUREG/CR7002 guidance, it is assumed that 20 percent of the permanent resident population, based on U.S. Census Bureau data, in this Shadow Region will elect to evacuate.

Shadow population characteristics (household size, evacuating vehicles per household, mobilization time) are assumed to be the same as that for the EPZ permanent resident population. Table 33, Figure 34, and Figure 35 present estimates of the shadow population and vehicles, by sector.

Table 33. Shadow Population and Vehicles by Sector Sector Population Evacuating Vehicles N 0 0 NNE 0 0 NE 383 204 ENE 433 228 E 92 48 ESE 327 169 SE 26 14 SSE 6 3 S 19,576 10,214 SSW 15,024 7,842 SW 6,937 3,621 WSW 3,580 1,870 W 3,900 2,036 WNW 4,302 2,247 NW 6,942 3,625 NNW 6,102 3,191 TOTAL 67,630 35,312 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 34. Shadow Population by Sector Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 35. Shadow Vehicles by Sector Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

3.3 Transient Population Transient population groups are defined as those people (who are not permanent residents, nor commuting employees) who enter the EPZ for a specific purpose (shopping, recreation).

Transients may spend less than one day or stay overnight at camping facilities, hotels and motels. The CCNPP EPZ has a number of areas and facilities that attract transients, including:

Lodging Facilities Parks Museums/Historical Sites Marinas Campgrounds Golf Courses Surveys of lodging facilities within the EPZ were conducted to determine the number of rooms, percentage of occupied rooms at peak times, and the number of people and vehicles per room for each facility. Data from the previous CCNPP ETE Study Report (Revision 3, March 2011) was used for facilities that did not respond to the survey. These data were used to estimate the number of transients and evacuating vehicles at each of these facilities. A total of 2,359 transients in 1,152 vehicles are assigned to lodging facilities in the EPZ.

Data was provided by the Counties on average daily attendance, and peak season of the marinas in the EPZ. Information was used from the previous ETE report for facilities for which new data was not received. This combination of data was used to estimate the number of transients and evacuating vehicles at each of these facilities. A total of 1,404 transients and 501 vehicles are assigned to marinas in the EPZ.

Supplemented with data provided by the Counties, surveys of the recreational areas within the EPZ were conducted to determine the number of transients visiting each of those places on a typical day. For this study, recreational areas include parks, campgrounds, historical sites, museums and golf courses. A total of 9,199 transients and 3,168 vehicles have been assigned to recreational areas within the EPZ.

Appendix E summarizes the transient data that was estimated for the EPZ. Table E5 presents the number of transients visiting recreational areas, while Table E7 presents the number of transients at lodging facilities within the EPZ.

These numbers are included in Table 34, which presents transient population and transient vehicle estimates by Zone. Figure 36 and Figure 37 present these data by sector and distance from the plant.

3.4 Seasonal Transient Population The CCNPP EPZ has a secondary category of transient population which is seasonal residents.

These people will enter the area during the summer months and may stay considerably longer (several weeks or the entire season) than the average transient using a hotel or motel. The seasonal population use other lodging facilities such as cottages, beach houses and summer Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 310 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

rentals that otherwise would not be captured in a typical lodging population.

The methodology behind calculating the seasonal population involves using 2010 Census Block data. Each Census Block includes information regarding the number of vacant and occupied households. Using this Census data, an average vacant household percentage was calculated for the entire CCNPP EPZ (27%).

It is assumed that seasonal residents will be renting homes near the Chesapeake Bay shoreline.

Using only those Census blocks that are within onehalf mile of the shoreline, the number of seasonal homes will be calculated. In order to normalize the data, the average vacant household percentage for the entire EPZ (27%) was subtracted from the percent vacancy for each individual census block. To determine the seasonal population, the remaining households from the analysis are considered to be seasonal households. An average household size of 2.8 persons per household is used to determine the seasonal transient population, and 1.46 evacuating vehicles per seasonal household is used to determine the number of seasonal transient vehicles. These numbers are adapted from the telephone survey results (see Appendix F).

Using this methodology, it is estimated that there is an additional seasonal population of 228 transients and 110 transient vehicles within the CCNPP EPZ. These numbers are included with the transient population in Table 34 as well as Figure 36 and Figure 37.

Table 34. Summary of Transients and Transient Vehicles Zone Transients Transient Vehicles 1 1,756 516 2 213 94 3 7,296 2,903 4 461 158 5 68 34 6 650 150 7 2,459 945 8 287 131 TOTAL 13,190 4,931 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 311 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 36. Transient Population by Sector Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 312 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 37. Transient Vehicles by Sector Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 313 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

3.5 Employees Employees who work within the EPZ fall into two categories:

Those who live and work in the EPZ Those who live outside of the EPZ and commute to jobs within the EPZ.

Those of the first category are already counted as part of the permanent resident population. To avoid double counting, we focus only on those employees commuting from outside the EPZ who will evacuate along with the permanent resident population.

Data provided by Calvert and St. Marys counties, combined with phone calls to these facilities, were used to estimate the number of employees within EPZ. For facilities that did not provide data, and after numerous attempts to gather this data, information was used from the previous report. In order to determine the number of employees commuting into the EPZ for employers that did not provide data, the US Census Longitudinal EmployerHousehold Dynamics from the OnTheMap Census analysis tool was used.

In Table E4, the Employees (Max Shift) is multiplied by the percent NonEPZ factor to determine the number of employees who are not residents of the EPZ. A vehicle occupancy of 1.03 employees per vehicle obtained from the telephone survey (See Figure F6) was used to determine the number of evacuating employee vehicles for all major employers.

Table 35 presents nonEPZ Resident employee and vehicle estimates by Zone. Figure 38 and Figure 39 present these data by sector.

Table 35. Summary of NonEPZ Resident Employees and Employee Vehicles Zone Employees Employee Vehicles 1 739 717 2 43 42 3 446 432 4 0 0 5 0 0 6 0 0 7 1,257 1,221 8 0 0 TOTAL 2,485 2,412 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 314 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 38. Employee Population by Sector Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 315 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 39. Employee Vehicles by Sector Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 316 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

3.6 Medical Facilities Data were provided by the counties for each of the medical facilities within the EPZ. Table E3 in Appendix E summarizes the data gathered. Section 8 details the evacuation of medical facilities and their patients. The number and type of evacuating vehicles that need to be provided depend on the patients' state of health. It is estimated that buses can transport up to 30 people and ambulances up to 2 people.

3.7 Total Demand in Addition to Permanent Population Some vehicles will be traveling through the EPZ (externalexternal trips) at the time of an accident. After the Advisory to Evacuate is announced, these throughtravelers will also evacuate. This EPZ has no true through roadways because it is on two peninsulas; however, the simulation model populates the network with some background traffic prior to the start of the evacuation to account for these travelers. The exact number of fill vehicles varies according to the case for Scenario 1 Region3 there are approximately 1,500. These vehicles evacuate immediately and are not included in the population totals.

3.8 Special Events There are two special events (Scenario 13 and Scenario 14) that are considered for the ETE study. Scenario 13 will consider The Naval Air Station Patuxent River Air Show as a special event. Based on information provided, it is estimated that 75% of EPZ and Shadow population will attend the event (90,212 people) and the total attendance is 100,000. In order to adjust the population realistically, the remaining 25% of the population will remain throughout the EPZ and Shadow Region. In calculating the number of vehicles that attend the event, the average household size of 2.8 was used, yielding 32,219 vehicles. The remaining population of 9,788 (Total Attendance - EPZ and Shadow population) is assumed to be transients. The average household size was also used in this calculation, yielding 3,496 transient vehicles. Therefore, in total there are 100,000 people and 35,715 vehicles expected to be in attendance at the Air Show. According to St. Marys County, people will park their cars within 400 yards of the event area. Since parking is encouraged in close proximity of the event area, public transportation is not provided for this event. The vehicle trips for this special event were generated utilizing the distribution used for transients.

The second special event that is considered within this study is the construction of a new unit at the CCNPP. Based on discussions with UniStar Nuclear, the peak construction workforce would be approximately 3,940, working in 3 shifts with 70%, 25%, and 5% of workers in each shift, respectively. An average vehicle occupancy of 1.3 workers per vehicle was used to convert workers to vehicles for Shift 1- 2,122 total vehicles. Additionally, 363 new employees (66%

during max shift, 1.05 workers per vehicle, yielding 228 vehicles) related to the new unit were considered. These employees combined with the construction staff result in a total of 2,350 additional vehicles. The existing roadway system is used for the construction scenario; no roadway improvements are considered; however, a new traffic signal at the entrance to the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 317 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

construction site along Nursery Road and Maryland Route 2/4 would be in place so the network was modified accordingly for this scenario. The vehicle trips were generated utilizing the same mobilization distributions for employees.

3.9 Summary of Demand A summary of population and vehicle demand is provided in Table 36 and Table 37, respectively. This summary includes all population groups described in this section. Additional population groups - transitdependent, special facility and school population - are described in greater detail in Section 8. A total of 144,842 people and 70,598 vehicles are considered in this study.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 318 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 36. Summary of Population Demand Transit Special Shadow Zone Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities Schools Population Total 1 5,777 104 1,756 739 6 1,185 0 9,567 2 4,928 89 213 43 5 599 0 5,877 3 19,752 360 7,296 446 195 3,745 0 31,794 4 5,396 97 461 0 0 0 0 5,954 5 2,793 50 68 0 0 0 0 2,911 6 4,635 83 650 0 0 0 0 5,368 7 9,109 164 2,459 1,257 0 2,203 0 15,192 8 262 0 287 0 0 0 0 549 Shadow 0 0 0 0 0 0 67,630 67,630 Total 52,652 947 13,190 2,485 206 7,732 67,630 144,842 NOTE: Shadow Population has been reduced to 20%. Refer to Figure 21 for additional information.

NOTE: Special Facilities include medical facilities.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 319 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 37. Summary of Vehicle Demand Transit Special Shadow Zone Residents Dependent Transients Employees Facilities Schools Population Total 1 3,016 8 516 717 5 56 0 4,318 2 2,585 6 94 42 2 32 0 2,761 3 10,310 24 2,903 432 28 172 0 13,869 4 2,823 6 158 0 0 0 0 2,987 5 1,461 2 34 0 0 0 0 1,497 6 2,419 6 150 0 0 0 0 2,575 7 4,753 12 945 1,221 0 76 0 7,007 8 141 0 131 0 0 0 0 272 Shadow 0 0 0 0 0 0 35,312 35,312 Total 27,508 64 4,931 2,412 35 336 35,312 70,598 NOTE: Buses represented as two passenger vehicles. Refer to Section 8 for additional information.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 320 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

4 ESTIMATION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY The ability of the road network to service vehicle demand is a major factor in determining how rapidly an evacuation can be completed. The capacity of a road is defined as the maximum hourly rate at which persons or vehicles can reasonably be expected to traverse a point or uniform section of a lane of roadway during a given time period under prevailing roadway, traffic and control conditions, as stated in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2010).

In discussing capacity, different operating conditions have been assigned alphabetical designations, A through F, to reflect the range of traffic operational characteristics. These designations have been termed "Levels of Service" (LOS). For example, LOS A connotes freeflow and highspeed operating conditions; LOS F represents a forced flow condition. LOS E describes traffic operating at or near capacity.

Another concept, closely associated with capacity, is Service Volume (SV). Service volume is defined as The maximum hourly rate at which vehicles, bicycles or persons reasonably can be expected to traverse a point or uniform section of a roadway during an hour under specific assumed conditions while maintaining a designated level of service. This definition is similar to that for capacity. The major distinction is that values of SV vary from one LOS to another, while capacity is the service volume at the upper bound of LOS E, only.

This distinction is illustrated in Exhibit 1117 of the HCM 2010. As indicated there, the SV varies with Free Flow Speed (FFS), and LOS. The SV is calculated by the DYNEV II simulation model, based on the specified link attributes, FFS, capacity, control device and traffic demand.

Other factors also influence capacity. These include, but are not limited to:

Lane width Shoulder width Pavement condition Horizontal and vertical alignment (curvature and grade)

Percent truck traffic Control device (and timing, if it is a signal)

Weather conditions (rain, snow, fog, wind speed, ice)

These factors are considered during the road survey and in the capacity estimation process; some factors have greater influence on capacity than others. For example, lane and shoulder width have only a limited influence on Base Free Flow Speed (BFFS1) according to Exhibit 157 of the HCM. Consequently, lane and shoulder widths at the narrowest points were observed during the road survey and these observations were recorded, but no detailed measurements of lane or shoulder width were taken. Horizontal and vertical alignment can influence both FFS and capacity. The estimated FFS were measured using the survey vehicles speedometer and observing local traffic, under free flow conditions. Capacity is estimated from the procedures of 1

A very rough estimate of BFFS might be taken as the posted speed limit plus 10 mph (HCM 2010 Page 1515)

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

the 2010 HCM. For example, HCM Exhibit 71(b) shows the sensitivity of Service Volume at the upper bound of LOS D to grade (capacity is the Service Volume at the upper bound of LOS E).

As discussed in Section 2.3, it is necessary to adjust capacity figures to represent the prevailing conditions during inclement weather. Based on limited empirical data, weather conditions such as rain reduce the values of free speed and of highway capacity by approximately 10 percent. Over the last decade new studies have been made on the effects of rain on traffic capacity. These studies indicate a range of effects between 5 and 20 percent depending on wind speed and precipitation rates. As indicated in Section 2.3, we employ a reduction in free speed and in highway capacity of 10 percent and 20 percent for rain and snow, respectively.

Since congestion arising from evacuation may be significant, estimates of roadway capacity must be determined with great care. Because of its importance, a brief discussion of the major factors that influence highway capacity is presented in this section.

Rural highways generally consist of: (1) one or more uniform sections with limited access (driveways, parking areas) characterized by uninterrupted flow; and (2) approaches to at grade intersections where flow can be interrupted by a control device or by turning or crossing traffic at the intersection. Due to these differences, separate estimates of capacity must be made for each section. Often, the approach to the intersection is widened by the addition of one or more lanes (turn pockets or turn bays), to compensate for the lower capacity of the approach due to the factors there that can interrupt the flow of traffic. These additional lanes are recorded during the field survey and later entered as input to the DYNEV II system.

4.1 Capacity Estimations on Approaches to Intersections Atgrade intersections are apt to become the first bottleneck locations under local heavy traffic volume conditions. This characteristic reflects the need to allocate access time to the respective competing traffic streams by exerting some form of control. During evacuation, control at critical intersections will often be provided by traffic control personnel assigned for that purpose, whose directions may supersede traffic control devices. The existing traffic management plans documented in the county emergency plans are extensive and were adopted without change.

The perlane capacity of an approach to a signalized intersection can be expressed (simplistically) in the following form:

3600 3600 where:

Qcap,m = Capacity of a single lane of traffic on an approach, which executes Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

movement, m, upon entering the intersection; vehicles per hour (vph) hm = Mean queue discharge headway of vehicles on this lane that are executing movement, m; seconds per vehicle G = Mean duration of GREEN time servicing vehicles that are executing movement, m, for each signal cycle; seconds L = Mean "lost time" for each signal phase servicing movement, m; seconds C = Duration of each signal cycle; seconds Pm = Proportion of GREEN time allocated for vehicles executing movement, m, from this lane. This value is specified as part of the control treatment.

m = The movement executed by vehicles after they enter the intersection: through, leftturn, rightturn, and diagonal.

The turnmovementspecific mean discharge headway hm, depends in a complex way upon many factors: roadway geometrics, turn percentages, the extent of conflicting traffic streams, the control treatment, and others. A primary factor is the value of "saturation queue discharge headway", hsat, which applies to through vehicles that are not impeded by other conflicting traffic streams. This value, itself, depends upon many factors including motorist behavior.

Formally, we can write, where:

hsat = Saturation discharge headway for through vehicles; seconds per vehicle F1,F2 = The various known factors influencing hm fm( ) = Complex function relating hm to the known (or estimated) values of hsat, F1, F2, The estimation of hm for specified values of hsat, F1, F2, ... is undertaken within the DYNEV II simulation model by a mathematical model2. The resulting values for hm always satisfy the condition:

2 Lieberman, E., "Determining Lateral Deployment of Traffic on an Approach to an Intersection", McShane, W. &

Lieberman, E., "Service Rates of Mixed Traffic on the far Left Lane of an Approach". Both papers appear in Transportation Research Record 772, 1980. Lieberman, E., Xin, W., Macroscopic Traffic Modeling For LargeScale Evacuation Planning, presented at the TRB 2012 Annual Meeting, January 2226, 2012 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

That is, the turnmovementspecific discharge headways are always greater than, or equal to the saturation discharge headway for through vehicles. These headways (or its inverse equivalent, saturation flow rate), may be determined by observation or using the procedures of the HCM 2010.

The above discussion is necessarily brief given the scope of this ETE report and the complexity of the subject of intersection capacity. In fact, Chapters 18, 19 and 20 in the HCM 2010 address this topic. The factors, F1, F2,, influencing saturation flow rate are identified in equation (185) of the HCM 2010.

The traffic signals within the EPZ and Shadow Region are modeled using representative phasing plans and phase durations obtained as part of the field data collection. Traffic responsive signal installations allow the proportion of green time allocated (Pm) for each approach to each intersection to be determined by the expected traffic volumes on each approach during evacuation circumstances. The amount of green time (G) allocated is subject to maximum and minimum phase duration constraints; 2 seconds of yellow time are indicated for each signal phase and 1 second of allred time is assigned between signal phases, typically. If a signal is pre timed, the yellow and allred times observed during the road survey are used. A lost time (L) of 2.0 seconds is used for each signal phase in the analysis.

4.2 Capacity Estimation along Sections of Highway The capacity of highway sections as distinct from approaches to intersections is a function of roadway geometrics, traffic composition (e.g. percent heavy trucks and buses in the traffic stream) and, of course, motorist behavior. There is a fundamental relationship which relates service volume (i.e. the number of vehicles serviced within a uniform highway section in a given time period) to traffic density. The top curve in Figure 41 illustrates this relationship.

As indicated, there are two flow regimes: (1) Free Flow (left side of curve); and (2) Forced Flow (right side). In the Free Flow regime, the traffic demand is fully serviced; the service volume increases as demand volume and density increase, until the service volume attains its maximum value, which is the capacity of the highway section. As traffic demand and the resulting highway density increase beyond this "critical" value, the rate at which traffic can be serviced (i.e. the service volume) can actually decline below capacity (capacity drop). Therefore, in order to realistically represent traffic performance during congested conditions (i.e. when demand exceeds capacity), it is necessary to estimate the service volume, VF, under congested conditions.

The value of VF can be expressed as:

where:

R = Reduction factor which is less than unity Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

We have employed a value of R=0.90. The advisability of such a capacity reduction factor is based upon empirical studies that identified a falloff in the service flow rate when congestion occurs at bottlenecks or choke points on a freeway system. Zhang and Levinson3 describe a research program that collected data from a computerbased surveillance system (loop detectors) installed on the Interstate Highway System, at 27 active bottlenecks in the twin cities metro area in Minnesota over a 7week period. When flow breakdown occurs, queues are formed which discharge at lower flow rates than the maximum capacity prior to observed breakdown. These queue discharge flow (QDF) rates vary from one location to the next and also vary by day of week and time of day based upon local circumstances. The cited reference presents a mean QDF of 2,016 passenger cars per hour per lane (pcphpl). This figure compares with the nominal capacity estimate of 2,250 pcphpl estimated for the ETE and indicated in Appendix K for freeway links. The ratio of these two numbers is 0.896 which translates into a capacity reduction factor of 0.90.

Since the principal objective of evacuation time estimate analyses is to develop a realistic estimate of evacuation times, use of the representative value for this capacity reduction factor (R=0.90) is justified. This factor is applied only when flow breaks down, as determined by the simulation model.

Rural roads, like freeways, are classified as uninterrupted flow facilities. (This is in contrast with urban street systems which have closely spaced signalized intersections and are classified as interrupted flow facilities.) As such, traffic flow along rural roads is subject to the same effects as freeways in the event traffic demand exceeds the nominal capacity, resulting in queuing and lower QDF rates. As a practical matter, rural roads rarely break down at locations away from intersections. Any breakdowns on rural roads are generally experienced at intersections where other model logic applies, or at lane drops which reduce capacity there.

Therefore, the application of a factor of 0.90 is appropriate on rural roads, but rarely, if ever, activated.

The estimated value of capacity is based primarily upon the type of facility and on roadway geometrics. Sections of roadway with adverse geometrics are characterized by lower freeflow speeds and lane capacity. Exhibit 1530 in the Highway Capacity Manual was referenced to estimate saturation flow rates. The impact of narrow lanes and shoulders on freeflow speed and on capacity is not material, particularly when flow is predominantly in one direction as is the case during an evacuation.

The procedure used here was to estimate "section" capacity, VE, based on observations made traveling over each section of the evacuation network, based on the posted speed limits and travel behavior of other motorists and by reference to the 2010 HCM. The DYNEV II simulation model determines for each highway section, represented as a network link, whether its capacity would be limited by the "sectionspecific" service volume, VE, or by the intersectionspecific capacity. For each link, the model selects the lower value of capacity.

3 Lei Zhang and David Levinson, Some Properties of Flows at Freeway Bottlenecks, Transportation Research Record 1883, 2004.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

4.3 Application to the CCNPP Study Area As part of the development of the linknode analysis network for the study area, an estimate of roadway capacity is required. The source material for the capacity estimates presented herein is contained in:

2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)

Transportation Research Board National Research Council Washington, D.C.

The highway system in the study area consists primarily of three categories of roads and, of course, intersections:

TwoLane roads: Local, State MultiLane Highways (atgrade)

Each of these classifications will be discussed.

4.3.1 TwoLane Roads Ref: HCM Chapter 15 Two lane roads comprise the majority of highways within the EPZ. The perlane capacity of a twolane highway is estimated at 1700 passenger cars per hour (pc/h). This estimate is essentially independent of the directional distribution of traffic volume except that, for extended distances, the twoway capacity will not exceed 3200 pc/h. The HCM procedures then estimate Level of Service (LOS) and Average Travel Speed. The DYNEV II simulation model accepts the specified value of capacity as input and computes average speed based on the timevarying demand: capacity relations.

Based on the field survey and on expected traffic operations associated with evacuation scenarios:

Most sections of twolane roads within the EPZ are classified as Class I, with "level terrain"; some are rolling terrain.

Class II highways are mostly those within urban and suburban centers.

4.3.2 MultiLane Highway Ref: HCM Chapter 14 Exhibit 142 of the HCM 2010 presents a set of curves that indicate a perlane capacity ranging from approximately 1900 to 2200 pc/h, for freespeeds of 45 to 60 mph, respectively. Based on observation, the multilane highways outside of urban areas within the EPZ service traffic with freespeeds in this range. The actual timevarying speeds computed by the simulation model reflect the demand: capacity relationship and the impact of control at intersections. A Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

conservative estimate of perlane capacity of 1900 pc/h is adopted for this study for multilane highways outside of urban areas, as shown in Appendix K.

4.3.3 Intersections Ref: HCM Chapters 18, 19, 20, 21 Procedures for estimating capacity and LOS for approaches to intersections are presented in Chapter 18 (signalized intersections), Chapters 19, 20 (unsignalized intersections) and Chapter 21 (roundabouts). The complexity of these computations is indicated by the aggregate length of these chapters. The DYNEV II simulation logic is likewise complex.

The simulation model explicitly models intersections: Stop/yield controlled intersections (both 2way and allway) and traffic signal controlled intersections. Where intersections are controlled by fixed time controllers, traffic signal timings are set to reflect average (non evacuation) traffic conditions. Actuated traffic signal settings respond to the timevarying demands of evacuation traffic to adjust the relative capacities of the competing intersection approaches.

The model is also capable of modeling the presence of manned traffic control. At specific locations where it is advisable or where existing plans call for overriding existing traffic control to implement manned control, the model will use actuated signal timings that reflect the presence of traffic guides. At locations where a special traffic control strategy (continuous left turns, contraflow lanes) is used, the strategy is modeled explicitly. Where applicable, the location and type of traffic control for nodes in the evacuation network are noted in Appendix K. The characteristics of the ten highest volume signalized intersections are detailed in Appendix J.

4.4 Simulation and Capacity Estimation Chapter 6 of the HCM is entitled, HCM and Alternative Analysis Tools. The chapter discusses the use of alternative tools such as simulation modeling to evaluate the operational performance of highway networks. Among the reasons cited in Chapter 6 to consider using simulation as an alternative analysis tool is:

The system under study involves a group of different facilities or travel modes with mutual interactions invoking several procedural chapters of the HCM. Alternative tools are able to analyze these facilities as a single system.

This statement succinctly describes the analyses required to determine traffic operations across an area encompassing an EPZ operating under evacuation conditions. The model utilized for this study, DYNEV II, is further described in Appendix C. It is essential to recognize that simulation models do not replicate the methodology and procedures of the HCM - they replace these procedures by describing the complex interactions of traffic flow and computing Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) detailing the operational performance of traffic over time and by location. The DYNEV II simulation model includes some HCM 2010 procedures only for the purpose of estimating capacity.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

All simulation models must be calibrated properly with field observations that quantify the performance parameters applicable to the analysis network. Two of the most important of these are: (1) Free flow speed (FFS); and (2) saturation headway, hsat. The first of these is estimated by direct observation during the road survey; the second is estimated using the concepts of the HCM 2010, as described earlier. These parameters are listed in Appendix K, for each network link.

Volume, vph Capacity Drop Qmax R Qmax Qs Density, vpm Flow Regimes Speed, mph Free Forced vf R vc Density, vpm kf kopt kj ks Figure 41. Fundamental Diagrams Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

5 ESTIMATION OF TRIP GENERATION TIME Federal Government guidelines (see NUREG CR7002) specify that the planner estimate the distributions of elapsed times associated with mobilization activities undertaken by the public to prepare for the evacuation trip. The elapsed time associated with each activity is represented as a statistical distribution reflecting differences between members of the public.

The quantification of these activitybased distributions relies largely on the results of the telephone survey. We define the sum of these distributions of elapsed times as the Trip Generation Time Distribution.

5.1 Background In general, an accident at a nuclear power plant is characterized by the following Emergency Action Classification (see Appendix 1 of NUREG 0654 for details):

1. Unusual Event

2. Alert

3. Site Area Emergency

4. General Emergency At each level, the Federal guidelines specify a set of Actions to be undertaken by the Licensee, and by State and Local offsite authorities. As a Planning Basis, we will adopt a conservative posture, in accordance with Section 1.2 of NUREG/CR7002, that a rapidly escalating accident will be considered in calculating the Trip Generation Time. We will assume:

1. The Advisory to Evacuate will be announced coincident with the siren notification.

2. Mobilization of the general population will commence within 15 minutes after the siren notification.

3. ETE are measured relative to the Advisory to Evacuate.

We emphasize that the adoption of this planning basis is not a representation that these events will occur within the indicated time frame. Rather, these assumptions are necessary in order to:

1. Establish a temporal framework for estimating the Trip Generation distribution in the format recommended in Section 2.13 of NUREG/CR6863.

2. Identify temporal points of reference that uniquely define "Clear Time" and ETE.

It is likely that a longer time will elapse between the various classes of an emergency.

For example, suppose one hour elapses from the EAS notification alert to the Advisory to Evacuate. In this case, it is reasonable to expect some degree of spontaneous evacuation by the public during this onehour period. As a result, the population within the EPZ will be lower when the Advisory to Evacuate is announced, than at the time of the siren alert. In addition, many will engage in preparation activities to evacuate, in anticipation that an Advisory will be broadcast. Thus, the time needed to complete the mobilization activities and the number of people remaining to evacuate the EPZ after the Advisory to Evacuate, will both be somewhat Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

less than the estimates presented in this report. Consequently, the ETE presented in this report are higher than the actual evacuation time, if this hypothetical situation were to take place.

The notification process consists of two events:

1. Transmitting information using the alert notification systems available within the EPZ (e.g. sirens, tone alerts, EAS broadcasts, loud speakers).

2. Receiving and correctly interpreting the information that is transmitted.

The population within the EPZ is dispersed over an area of approximately 180 square miles and is engaged in a wide variety of activities. It must be anticipated that some time will elapse between the transmission and receipt of the information advising the public of an accident.

The amount of elapsed time will vary from one individual to the next depending on where that person is, what that person is doing, and related factors. Furthermore, some persons who will be directly involved with the evacuation process may be outside the EPZ at the time the emergency is declared. These people may be commuters, shoppers and other travelers who reside within the EPZ and who will return to join the other household members upon receiving notification of an emergency.

As indicated in Section 2.13 of NUREG/CR6863, the estimated elapsed times for the receipt of notification can be expressed as a distribution reflecting the different notification times for different people within, and outside, the EPZ. By using time distributions, it is also possible to distinguish between different population groups and different dayofweek and timeofday scenarios, so that accurate ETE may be computed.

For example, people at home or at work within the EPZ will be notified by the EAS, and/or tone alert and/or radio (if available). Those well outside the EPZ will be notified by telephone, radio, TV and wordofmouth, with potentially longer time lags. Furthermore, the spatial distribution of the EPZ population will differ with time of day families will be united in the evenings, but dispersed during the day. In this respect, weekends will differ from weekdays.

As indicated in Section 4.1 of NUREG/CR7002, the information required to compute trip generation times is typically obtained from a telephone survey of EPZ residents. Such a survey was conducted in support of this ETE study. Appendix F presents the survey sampling plan, survey instrument, and raw survey results. The remaining discussion will focus on the application of the trip generation data obtained from the telephone survey to the development of the ETE documented in this report.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

5.2 Fundamental Considerations The environment leading up to the time that people begin their evacuation trips consists of a sequence of events and activities. Each event (other than the first) occurs at an instant in time and is the outcome of an activity.

Activities are undertaken over a period of time. Activities may be in "series" (i.e. to undertake an activity implies the completion of all preceding events) or may be in parallel (two or more activities may take place over the same period of time). Activities conducted in series are functionally dependent on the completion of prior activities; activities conducted in parallel are functionally independent of one another. The relevant events associated with the public's preparation for evacuation are:

Event Number Event Description 1 Notification 2 Awareness of Situation 3 Depart Work 4 Arrive Home 5 Depart on Evacuation Trip Associated with each sequence of events are one or more activities, as outlined below:

Table 51. Event Sequence for Evacuation Activities Event Sequence Activity Distribution 12 Receive Notification 1 23 Prepare to Leave Work 2 2,3 4 Travel Home 3 2,4 5 Prepare to Leave to Evacuate 4 N/A Snow Clearance 5 These relationships are shown graphically in Figure 51.

An Event is a state that exists at a point in time (e.g., depart work, arrive home)

An Activity is a process that takes place over some elapsed time (e.g., prepare to leave work, travel home)

As such, a completed Activity changes the state of an individual (e.g. the activity, travel home changes the state from depart work to arrive home). Therefore, an Activity can be described as an Event Sequence; the elapsed times to perform an event sequence vary from one person to the next and are described as statistical distributions on the following pages.

An employee who lives outside the EPZ will follow sequence (c) of Figure 51. A household Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

within the EPZ that has one or more commuters at work, and will await their return before beginning the evacuation trip will follow the first sequence of Figure 51(a). A household within the EPZ that has no commuters at work, or that will not await the return of any commuters, will follow the second sequence of Figure 51(a), regardless of day of week or time of day.

Households with no commuters on weekends or in the evening/nighttime, will follow the applicable sequence in Figure 51(b). Transients will always follow one of the sequences of Figure 51(b). Some transients away from their residence could elect to evacuate immediately without returning to the residence, as indicated in the second sequence.

It is seen from Figure 51, that the Trip Generation time (i.e. the total elapsed time from Event 1 to Event 5) depends on the scenario and will vary from one household to the next.

Furthermore, Event 5 depends, in a complicated way, on the time distributions of all activities preceding that event. That is, to estimate the time distribution of Event 5, we must obtain estimates of the time distributions of all preceding events. For this study, we adopt the conservative posture that all activities will occur in sequence.

In some cases, assuming certain events occur strictly sequential (for instance, commuter returning home before beginning preparation to leave, or removing snow only after the preparation to leave) can result in rather conservative (that is, longer) estimates of mobilization times. It is reasonable to expect that at least some parts of these events will overlap for many households, but that assumption is not made in this study.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

1 2 3 4 5 Residents Households wait 1

for Commuters Households without Residents 1 2 5 Commuters and households who do not wait for Commuters (a) Accident occurs during midweek, at midday; year round Residents, Transients 1 2 4 5 Return to residence, away from then evacuate Residence Residents, 1 2 5 Residents at home; Transients at transients evacuate directly Residence (b) Accident occurs during weekend or during the evening2 1 2 3, 5 (c) Employees who live outside the EPZ ACTIVITIES EVENTS 1 2 Receive Notification 1. Notification 2 3 Prepare to Leave Work 2. Aware of situation 2, 3 4 Travel Home 3. Depart work 2, 4 5 Prepare to Leave to Evacuate 4. Arrive home

5. Depart on evacuation trip Activities Consume Time 1

Applies for evening and weekends also if commuters are at work.

2 Applies throughout the year for transients.

Figure 51. Events and Activities Preceding the Evacuation Trip Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

5.3 Estimated Time Distributions of Activities Preceding Event 5 The time distribution of an event is obtained by "summing" the time distributions of all prior contributing activities. (This "summing" process is quite different than an algebraic sum since it is performed on distributions - not scalar numbers).

Time Distribution No. 1, Notification Process: Activity 1 2 In accordance with the 2012 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manual, 100% of the population is notified within 45 minutes. It is assumed (based on the presence of sirens within the EPZ) that 87 percent of those within the EPZ will be aware of the accident within 30 minutes with the remainder notified within the following 15 minutes. The Code Red mass telephone notification system and public address systems may also be used to notify the population of an emergency and messages will be broadcast on the local Emergency Alert System (EAS) radio or television.

The notification distribution is given below:

Table 52. Time Distribution for Notifying the Public Elapsed Time Percent of (Minutes) Population Notified 0 0%

5 7%

10 13%

15 27%

20 47%

25 66%

30 87%

35 92%

40 97%

45 100%

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Distribution No. 2, Prepare to Leave Work: Activity 2 3 It is reasonable to expect that the vast majority of business enterprises within the EPZ will elect to shut down following notification and most employees would leave work quickly. Commuters, who work outside the EPZ could, in all probability, also leave quickly since facilities outside the EPZ would remain open and other personnel would remain. Personnel or farmers responsible for equipment/livestock would require additional time to secure their facility. The distribution of Activity 2 3 shown in Table 53 reflects data obtained by the telephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 52.

Table 53. Time Distribution for Employees to Prepare to Leave Work Cumulative Cumulative Percent Percent Elapsed Time Employees Elapsed Time Employees (Minutes) Leaving Work (Minutes) Leaving Work 0 0% 45 88.1%

5 36.3% 50 88.7%

10 50.0% 55 88.7%

15 60.5% 60 95.0%

20 68.8% 75 97.0%

25 71.6% 90 98.6%

30 81.0% 105 99.6%

35 82.3% 120 100.0%

40 84.8%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response. That is, the sample was reduced in size to include only those households who responded to this question. The underlying assumption is that the distribution of this activity for the Dont know responders, if the event takes place, would be the same as those responders who provided estimates.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Distribution No. 3, Travel Home: Activity 3 4 These data are provided directly by those households which responded to the telephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 52 and listed in Table 54.

Table 54. Time Distribution for Commuters to Travel Home Cumulative Cumulative Elapsed Time Percent Elapsed Time Percent (Minutes) Returning Home (Minutes) Returning Home 0 0 45 76.2%

5 5.6% 50 77.9%

10 17.2% 55 77.9%

15 32.5% 60 83.8%

20 44.4% 75 89.5%

25 50.7% 90 95.6%

30 63.8% 105 97.9%

35 66.6% 120 100.0%

40 69.7%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Distribution No. 4, Prepare to Leave Home: Activity 2, 4 5 These data are provided directly by those households which responded to the telephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 52 and listed in Table 55.

Table 55. Time Distribution for Population to Prepare to Evacuate Cumulative Elapsed Time Percent Ready to (Minutes) Evacuate 0 0%

15 29.3%

30 66.4%

45 73.0%

60 89.1%

75 93.8%

90 94.0%

105 94.2%

120 96.8%

135 98.1%

150 98.3%

165 98.3%

180 99.6%

195 100.0%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Distribution No. 5, Snow Clearance Time Distribution Inclement weather scenarios involving snowfall must address the time lags associated with snow clearance. It is assumed that snow equipment is mobilized and deployed during the snowfall to maintain passable roads. The general consensus is that the snowplowing efforts are generally successful for all but the most extreme blizzards when the rate of snow accumulation exceeds that of snow clearance over a period of many hours.

Consequently, it is reasonable to assume that the highway system will remain passable - albeit at a lower capacity - under the vast majority of snow conditions. Nevertheless, for the vehicles to gain access to the highway system, it may be necessary for driveways and employee parking lots to be cleared to the extent needed to permit vehicles to gain access to the roadways.

These clearance activities take time; this time must be incorporated into the trip generation time distributions. These data are provided by those households which responded to the telephone survey. This distribution is plotted in Figure 52 and listed in Table 56.

Table 56. Time Distribution for Population to Clear 6"8" of Snow Cumulative Percent Elapsed Time Completing (Minutes) Snow Removal 0 0%

15 40.4%

30 73.0%

45 81.8%

60 89.9%

75 93.6%

90 95.4%

105 96.9%

120 99.3%

135 99.8%

150 100.0%

NOTE: The survey data was normalized to distribute the "Don't know" response Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 510 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Mobilization Activities 100%

80%

60%

Notification Prepare to Leave Work Travel Home 40%

Prepare Home Time to Clear Snow 20%

Percent of Population Completing Mobilization Activity 0%

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 Elapsed Time from Start of Mobilization Activity (min)

Figure 52. Evacuation Mobilization Activities Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 511 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

5.4 Calculation of Trip Generation Time Distribution The time distributions for each of the mobilization activities presented herein must be combined to form the appropriate Trip Generation Distributions. As discussed above, this study assumes that the stated events take place in sequence such that all preceding events must be completed before the current event can occur. For example, if a household awaits the return of a commuter, the worktohome trip (Activity 3 4) must precede Activity 4 5.

To calculate the time distribution of an event that is dependent on two sequential activities, it is necessary to sum the distributions associated with these prior activities. The distribution summing algorithm is applied repeatedly as shown to form the required distribution. As an outcome of this procedure, new time distributions are formed; we assign letter designations to these intermediate distributions to describe the procedure. Table 57 presents the summing procedure to arrive at each designated distribution.

Table 57. Mapping Distributions to Events Apply Summing Algorithm To: Distribution Obtained Event Defined Distributions 1 and 2 Distribution A Event 3 Distributions A and 3 Distribution B Event 4 Distributions B and 4 Distribution C Event 5 Distributions 1 and 4 Distribution D Event 5 Distributions C and 5 Distribution E Event 5 Distributions D and 5 Distribution F Event 5 Table 58 presents a description of each of the final trip generation distributions achieved after the summing process is completed.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 512 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 58. Description of the Distributions Distribution Description Time distribution of commuters departing place of work (Event 3). Also applies A to employees who work within the EPZ who live outside, and to Transients within the EPZ.

B Time distribution of commuters arriving home (Event 4).

Time distribution of residents with commuters who return home, leaving home C

to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

Time distribution of residents without commuters returning home, leaving home D

to begin the evacuation trip (Event 5).

Time distribution of residents with commuters who return home, leaving home E

to begin the evacuation trip, after snow clearance activities (Event 5).

Time distribution of residents with no commuters returning home, leaving to F

begin the evacuation trip, after snow clearance activities (Event 5).

5.4.1 Statistical Outliers As already mentioned, some portion of the survey respondents answer dont know to some questions or choose to not respond to a question. The mobilization activity distributions are based upon actual responses. But, it is the nature of surveys that a few numeric responses are inconsistent with the overall pattern of results. An example would be a case in which for 500 responses, almost all of them estimate less than two hours for a given answer, but 3 say four hours and 4 say six or more hours.

These outliers must be considered: are they valid responses, or so atypical that they should be dropped from the sample?

In assessing outliers, there are three alternates to consider:

1) Some responses with very long times may be valid, but reflect the reality that the respondent really needs to be classified in a different population subgroup, based upon special needs;

2) Other responses may be unrealistic (6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> to return home from commuting distance, or 2 days to prepare the home for departure);

3) Some high values are representative and plausible, and one must not cut them as part of the consideration of outliers.

The issue of course is how to make the decision that a given response or set of responses are to be considered outliers for the component mobilization activities, using a method that objectively quantifies the process.

There is considerable statistical literature on the identification and treatment of outliers singly or in groups, much of which assumes the data is normally distributed and some of which uses non Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 513 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

parametric methods to avoid that assumption. The literature cites that limited work has been done directly on outliers in sample survey responses.

In establishing the overall mobilization time/trip generation distributions, the following principles are used:

1) It is recognized that the overall trip generation distributions are conservative estimates, because they assume a household will do the mobilization activities sequentially, with no overlap of activities;

2) The individual mobilization activities (prepare to leave work, travel home, prepare home, clear snow) are reviewed for outliers, and then the overall trip generation distributions are created (see Figure 51, Table 57, Table 58);

3) Outliers can be eliminated either because the response reflects a special population (e.g.

special needs, transit dependent) or lack of realism, because the purpose is to estimate trip generation patterns for personal vehicles;

4) To eliminate outliers, a) the mean and standard deviation of the specific activity are estimated from the responses, b) the median of the same data is estimated, with its position relative to the mean noted, c) the histogram of the data is inspected, and d) all values greater than 3.5 standard deviations are flagged for attention, taking special note of whether there are gaps (categories with zero entries) in the histogram display.

In general, only flagged values more than 4 standard deviations from the mean are allowed to be considered outliers, with gaps in the histogram expected.

When flagged values are classified as outliers and dropped, steps a to d are repeated.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 514 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

5) As a practical matter, even with outliers eliminated by the above, the resultant histogram, viewed as a cumulative distribution, is not a normal distribution. A typical situation that results is shown below in Figure 53.

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

Cumulative Percentage (%)

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%

112.5 2.5 7.5 12.5 17.5 22.5 27.5 32.5 37.5 42.5 47.5 52.5 57.5 67.5 82.5 97.5 Center of Interval (minutes)

Cumulative Data Cumulative Normal Figure 53. Comparison of Data Distribution and Normal Distribution

6) In particular, the cumulative distribution differs from the normal distribution in two key aspects, both very important in loading a network to estimate evacuation times:

Most of the real data is to the left of the normal curve above, indicating that the network loads faster for the first 8085% of the vehicles, potentially causing more (and earlier) congestion than otherwise modeled; The last 1015% of the real data tails off slower than the comparable normal curve, indicating that there is significant traffic still loading at later times.

Because these two features are important to preserve, it is the histogram of the data that is used to describe the mobilization activities, not a normal curve fit to the data. One could consider other distributions, but using the shape of the actual data curve is unambiguous and preserves these important features;

7) With the mobilization activities each modeled according to Steps 16, including preserving the features cited in Step 6, the overall (or total) mobilization times are constructed.

This is done by using the data sets and distributions under different scenarios (e.g. commuter returning, no commuter returning, no snow or snow in each). In general, these are additive, using Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 515 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

weighting based upon the probability distributions of each element; Figure 54 presents the combined trip generation distributions designated A, C, D, E and F. These distributions are presented on the same time scale. (As discussed earlier, the use of strictly additive activities is a conservative approach, because it makes all activities sequential - preparation for departure follows the return of the commuter; snow clearance follows the preparation for departure, and so forth. In practice, it is reasonable that some of these activities are done in parallel, at least to some extent - for instance, preparation to depart begins by a household member at home while the commuter is still on the road.)

The mobilization distributions that result are used in their tabular/graphical form as direct inputs to later computations that lead to the ETE.

The DYNEV II simulation model is designed to accept varying rates of vehicle trip generation for each origin centroid, expressed in the form of histograms. These histograms, which represent Distributions A, C, D, E and F, properly displaced with respect to one another, are tabulated in Table 59 (Distribution B, Arrive Home, omitted for clarity).

The final time period (15) is 600 minutes long. This time period is added to allow the analysis network to clear, in the event congestion persists beyond the trip generation period. Note that there are no trips generated during this final time period.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 516 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

5.4.2 Staged Evacuation Trip Generation As defined in NUREG/CR7002, staged evacuation consists of the following:

1. Zones comprising the 2 mile region are advised to evacuate immediately

2. Zones comprising regions extending from 2 to 5 miles downwind are advised to shelter inplace while the 2 mile region is cleared

3. As vehicles evacuate the 2 mile region, sheltered people from 2 to 5 miles downwind continue preparation for evacuation

4. The population sheltering in the 2 to 5 mile region are advised to begin evacuating when approximately 90% of those originally within the 2 mile region evacuate across the 2 mile region boundary

5. Noncompliance with the shelter recommendation is the same as the shadow evacuation percentage of 20%

Assumptions

1. The EPZ population in zones beyond 5 miles will react as does the population in the 2 to 5 mile region; that is they will first shelter, then evacuate after the 90th percentile ETE for the 2 mile region

2. The population in the shadow region beyond the EPZ boundary, extending to approximately 15 miles radially from the plant, will react as they do for all nonstaged evacuation scenarios. That is 20% of these households will elect to evacuate with no shelter delay.

3. The transient population will not be expected to stage their evacuation because of the limited sheltering options available to people who may be at parks, on a beach, or at other venues. Also, notifying the transient population of a staged evacuation would prove difficult.

4. Employees will also be assumed to evacuate without first sheltering.

Procedure

1. Trip generation for population groups in the 2 mile region will be as computed based upon the results of the telephone survey and analysis.

2. Trip generation for the population subject to staged evacuation will be formulated as follows:

a. Identify the 90th percentile evacuation time for the zones comprising the two mile region. This value, TScen*, is obtained from simulation results. It will become the time at which the region being sheltered will be told to evacuate for each scenario.

b. The resultant trip generation curves for staging are then formed as follows:

i. The nonshelter trip generation curve is followed until a maximum of 20%

of the total trips are generated (to account for shelter noncompliance).

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 517 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

ii. No additional trips are generated until time TScen*

iii. Following time TScen*, the balance of trips are generated:

1. by stepping up and then following the nonshelter trip generation curve (if TScen* is < max trip generation time) or

2. by stepping up to 100% (if TScen* is > max trip generation time)

c. Note: This procedure implies that there may be different staged trip generation distributions for different scenarios. NUREG/CR7002 uses the statement approximately 90th percentile as the time to end staging and begin evacuating.

The value of TScen* is approximately 2:45 for nonsnow scenarios and 3:30 for snow scenarios. For Special Event 1 (Airshow) the value of TScen is 1:30.

3. Staged trip generation distributions are created for the following population groups:

a. Residents with returning commuters

b. Residents without returning commuters

c. Residents with returning commuters and snow conditions

d. Residents without returning commuters and snow conditions Figure 55 presents the staged trip generation distributions for both residents with and without returning commuters; the 90th percentile twomile evacuation time is approximately 165 minutes for good weather and 210 minutes for snow scenarios. At the 90th percentile evacuation time, 20% of the population (who normally would have completed their mobilization activities for an unstaged evacuation) advised to shelter has nevertheless departed the area. These people do not comply with the shelter advisory. Also included on the plot are the trip generation distributions for these groups as applied to the regions advised to evacuate immediately.

Since the 90th percentile evacuation time occurs before the end of the trip generation time, after the sheltered region is advised to evacuate, the shelter trip generation distribution rises to meet the balance of the nonstaged trip generation distribution. Following time TScen*, the balance of staged evacuation trips that are ready to depart are released within 15 minutes. After TScen*+15, the remainder of evacuation trips are generated in accordance with the unstaged trip generation distribution.

Table 510 provides the trip generation histograms for staged evacuation.

5.4.3 Trip Generation for Waterways and Recreational Areas Section 1.5.2.4 of the Calvert County Radiological Emergency Plan, Section 3.6.2.4 of the Dorchester REP and 1.5.2.4, indicate the following:

The State Department of Natural Resources' Forest and Park Services will notify campers and visitors in Calvert Cliffs State Park.

The Natural Resources Police will provide evacuation notification information to pleasure and commercial craft in the waters surrounding CCNPP by public address systems from boats and/or motor vehicles, by personal contact, or by VHF or citizens band radio.

The Natural Resources Police will also provide boat transportation for evacuees from Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 518 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

special areas, if necessary.

Backup notification procedures are available in the event of siren system failure.

As indicated in Table 52, this study assumes 100% notification in 45 minutes. Table 59 indicates that all transients will have mobilized within 135 minutes. Given the multitiered approach to notification, it is assumed that all transients will receive notification and be able to start their evacuation trip within this time frame.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 519 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 59. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Unstaged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period Residents Residents With Residents Residents with Without Commuters Without Time Duration Employees Transients Commuters Commuters Snow Commuters Snow Period (Min) (Distribution A) (Distribution A) (Distribution C) (Distribution D) (Distribution E) (Distribution F) 1 15 6% 6% 0% 2% 0% 0%

2 30 61% 61% 3% 43% 0% 12%

3 30 23% 23% 20% 35% 7% 37%

4 15 5% 5% 15% 10% 10% 15%

5 30 4% 4% 25% 4% 23% 19%

6 15 1% 1% 10% 1% 12% 5%

7 15 0% 0% 8% 2% 10% 3%

8 15 0% 0% 5% 1% 9% 3%

9 30 0% 0% 8% 1% 13% 3%

10 15 0% 0% 2% 1% 5% 1%

11 30 0% 0% 2% 0% 5% 1%

12 30 0% 0% 1% 0% 3% 1%

13 30 0% 0% 1% 0% 2% 0%

14 30 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0%

15 600 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

NOTE:

Shadow vehicles are loaded onto the analysis network (Figure 12) using Distributions C and E for good weather and snow, respectively.

Special event vehicles are loaded using Distribution A.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 520 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Trip Generation Distributions Employees/Transients Residents with Commuters Residents with no Commuters Res with Comm and Snow Res no Comm with Snow 100 80 60 40 20 Percent of Population Beginning Evacuation Trip 0

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

Figure 54. Comparison of Trip Generation Distributions Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 521 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 510. Trip Generation Histograms for the EPZ Population for Staged Evacuation Percent of Total Trips Generated Within Indicated Time Period*

Residents Residents Residents with Without Residents With Without Time Duration Commuters Commuters Commuters Snow Commuters Snow Period (Min) (Distribution C) (Distribution D) (Distribution E) (Distribution F) 1 15 0% 0% 0% 0%

2 30 1% 9% 0% 2%

3 30 4% 7% 1% 8%

4 15 3% 2% 2% 3%

5 30 5% 1% 5% 4%

6 15 2% 0% 2% 1%

7 15 1% 0% 2% 0%

8 15 1% 1% 2% 1%

9 30 77% 79% 3% 0%

10 15 2% 1% 1% 1%

11 30 2% 0% 76% 79%

12 30 1% 0% 3% 1%

13 30 1% 0% 2% 0%

14 30 0% 0% 1% 0%

15 600 0% 0% 0% 0%

• Trip Generation for Employees and Transients (see Table 59) is the same for Unstaged and Staged Evacuation.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 522 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Staged and Unstaged Evacuation Trip Generation Employees / Transients Residents with Commuters Residents with no Commuters Res with Comm and Snow Res no Comm with Snow Staged Residents with Commuters Staged Residents with no Commuters Staged Residents with Commuters (Snow)

Staged Residents with no Commuters (Snow) Staged Residents with Commuters Airshow Staged Residents with no Commuters Airshow 100 80 60

% of Population Evacuating 40 20 0

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 Elapsed Time from Evacuation Advisory (min)

Figure 55. Comparison of Staged and Unstaged Trip Generation Distributions in the 2 to 5 Mile Region Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 523 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

6 DEMAND ESTIMATION FOR EVACUATION SCENARIOS An evacuation case defines a combination of Evacuation Region and Evacuation Scenario.

The definitions of Region and Scenario are as follows:

Region A grouping of contiguous evacuating Zones that forms either a keyhole sectorbased area, or a circular area within the EPZ, that must be evacuated in response to a radiological emergency.

Scenario A combination of circumstances, including time of day, day of week, season, and weather conditions. Scenarios define the number of people in each of the affected population groups and their respective mobilization time distributions.

A total of 17 Regions were defined which encompass all the groupings of Zones considered.

These Regions are defined in Table 61. The Zone configurations are identified in Figure 61.

Each keyhole sectorbased area consists of a central circle centered at the power plant, and three adjoining sectors, each with a central angle of 22.5 degrees, as per NUREG/CR7002 guidance. The central sector coincides with the wind direction. These sectors extend to 5 miles from the plant (Regions R05 and R06) or to the EPZ boundary (Regions R07 through R14).

Regions R01, R02 and R03 represent evacuations of circular areas with radii of 2, 5 and 10 miles, respectively. Regions R15, R16 and R17 are identical to Regions R05, R02 and R06, respectively; however, those zones between 2 miles and 5 miles are staged until 90% of the 2mile region (Region R01) has evacuated.

A total of 15 Scenarios were evaluated for all Regions. Thus, there are a total of 17x15=255 evacuation cases. Table 62 is a description of all Scenarios.

Each combination of region and scenario implies a specific population to be evacuated. Table 63 presents the percentage of each population group estimated to evacuate for each scenario.

Table 64 presents the vehicle counts for each scenario for an evacuation of Region R03 - the entire EPZ.

The vehicle estimates presented in Section 3 are peak values. These peak values are adjusted depending on the scenario and region being considered, using scenario and region specific percentages, such that the average population is considered for each evacuation case. The scenario percentages are presented in Table 63, while the regional percentages are provided in Table H1. The percentages presented in Table 63 were determined as follows:

The number of residents with commuters during the week (when workforce is at its peak) is equal to the product of 65% (the number of households with at least one commuter) and 58%

(the number of households with a commuter that would await the return of the commuter prior to evacuating). See assumption 3 in Section 2.3. It is estimated for weekend and evening scenarios that 10% of households with returning commuters will have a commuter at work during those times.

Employment is assumed to be at its peak during the winter, midweek, midday scenarios.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 61 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Employment is reduced slightly (96%) for summer, midweek, midday scenarios. This is based on the estimation that 50% of the employees commuting into the EPZ will be on vacation for a week during the approximate 12 weeks of summer. It is further estimated that those taking vacation will be uniformly dispersed throughout the summer with approximately 4% of employees vacationing each week. It is further estimated that only 10% of the employees are working in the evenings and during the weekends.

Transient activity is estimated to be at its peak during summer weekends and less (50%) during the week. As shown in Appendix E, there is a significant amount of lodging and campgrounds offering overnight accommodations in the EPZ; thus, transient activity is estimated to be 25%

for summer evenings and 15% for winter evenings. Transient activity on winter weekends is estimated to be 40%.

As noted in the shadow footnote to Table 63, the shadow percentages are computed using a base of 20% (see assumption 5 in Section 2.2); to include the employees within the shadow region who may choose to evacuate, the voluntary evacuation is multiplied by a scenario specific proportion of employees to permanent residents in the shadow region. For example, using the values provided in Table 64 for Scenario 1, the shadow percentage is computed as follows:

2,316 20% 1 22%

10,365 17,143 Two special events - The Naval Air Station Patuxent River Air Show & the construction of a new unit at the CCNPP site - were considered as Scenario 13 and Scenario 14, respectively. Thus, the special event traffic is 100% evacuated for the applicable, and 0% for all other scenarios.

It is estimated that summer school enrollment is approximately 10% of enrollment during the regular school year for summer, midweek, midday scenarios. School is not in session during weekends and evenings, thus no buses for school children are needed under those circumstances. As discussed in Section 7, schools are in session during the winter season, midweek, midday and 100% of buses will be needed under those circumstances. Transit buses for the transitdependent population are set to 100% for all scenarios as it is assumed that the transitdependent population is present in the EPZ for all scenarios.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 62 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 61. Description of Evacuation Regions Zone Region Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R01 2Mile Radius x R02 5Mile Radius x x x R03 Full EPZ x x x x x x x x R04 Dorchester County x Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to 5 Miles Zone Region Wind Direction From: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R05 NW, NNW, N, NNE x x N/A NE Refer to Region R02 R06 ENE, E, ESE, SE, SSE x x S, SSW, SW, WSW, W, N/A WNW Refer to Region R01 Evacuate 5Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R07 N x x x x R08 NNE, NE x x x x x R09 ENE x x x x x x R10 E x x x x x R11 ESE x x x x x x R12 SE, SSE x x x x x R13 S x x x x R14 SW, WSW, W, WNW x x x x N/A SSW, NW, NNW Refer to Region R02 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Zone Region Wind Direction From: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R15 NW, NNW, N, NNE x x R16 NE, x x x R17 ENE, E, ESE, SE, SSE x x S, SSW, SW, WSW,W, N/A WNW Refer to Region R01 ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) then Evacuate Evacuate Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 63 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 61. CCNPP EPZ Zones Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 62. Evacuation Scenario Definitions Scenarios Season Day of Week Time of Day Weather Special 1 Summer Midweek Midday Good None 2 Summer Midweek Midday Rain None 3 Summer Weekend Midday Good None 4 Summer Weekend Midday Rain None Midweek, 5 Summer Evening Good None Weekend 6 Winter Midweek Midday Good None 7 Winter Midweek Midday Rain None 8 Winter Midweek Midday Snow None 9 Winter Weekend Midday Good None 10 Winter Weekend Midday Rain None 11 Winter Weekend Midday Snow None Midweek, 12 Winter Evening Good None Weekend The Naval Air Station 13 Summer Weekend Midday Good Patuxent River Air Show New Plant 14 Summer Midweek Midday Good Construction Roadway Impact Closure of the 15 Summer Midweek Midday Good Thomas Johnson Bridge Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 65 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 63. Percent of Population Groups Evacuating for Various Scenarios Households Households Special With Without Special Event 2 -

Returning Returning Event 1 New Plant School Transit Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Airshow Construction Buses Buses 1 38% 62% 96% 50% 22% 0% 0% 10% 100%

2 38% 62% 96% 50% 22% 0% 0% 10% 100%

3 4% 96% 10% 100% 20% 0% 0% 0% 100%

4 4% 96% 10% 100% 20% 0% 0% 0% 100%

5 4% 96% 10% 25% 20% 0% 0% 0% 100%

6 38% 62% 100% 25% 22% 0% 0% 100% 100%

7 38% 62% 100% 25% 22% 0% 0% 100% 100%

8 38% 62% 100% 25% 22% 0% 0% 100% 100%

9 4% 96% 10% 40% 20% 0% 0% 0% 100%

10 4% 96% 10% 40% 20% 0% 0% 0% 100%

11 4% 96% 10% 40% 20% 0% 0% 0% 100%

12 4% 96% 10% 15% 20% 0% 0% 0% 100%

13 4% 96% 10% 100% 20% 100% 0% 0% 100%

14 38% 62% 96% 50% 22% 0% 100% 10% 100%

15 38% 62% 96% 50% 22% 0% 0% 10% 100%

Resident Households with Commuters .......Households of EPZ residents who await the return of commuters prior to beginning the evacuation trip.

Resident Households with No Commuters ..Households of EPZ residents who do not have commuters or will not await the return of commuters prior to beginning the evacuation trip.

Employees..................................................EPZ employees who live outside the EPZ Transients ..................................................People who are in the EPZ at the time of an accident for recreational or other (nonemployment) purposes.

Shadow ......................................................Residents and employees in the shadow region (outside of the EPZ) who will spontaneously decide to relocate during the evacuation. The basis for the values shown is a 20% relocation of shadow residents along with a proportional percentage of shadow employees.

Special Events..Additional vehicles in the EPZ due to the identified special event.

School and Transit Buses ............................Vehicleequivalents present on the road during evacuation servicing schools and transitdependent people (1 bus is equivalent to 2 passenger vehicles).

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 66 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 64. Vehicle Estimates by Scenario Households Households Special Event Total With Without Special 2 - New Scenario Returning Returning Event 1 Plant School Transit Vehicles Scenario Commuters Commuters Employees Transients Shadow Airshow Construction Buses Buses 1 10,365 17,143 2,316 2,466 7,657 34 66 40,046 2 10,365 17,143 2,316 2,466 7,657 34 66 40,046 3 1,037 26,472 241 4,931 7,124 66 39,869 4 1,037 26,472 241 4,931 7,124 66 39,869 5 1,037 26,472 241 1,233 7,124 66 36,171 6 10,365 17,143 2,412 1,233 7,682 336 66 39,245 7 10,365 17,143 2,412 1,233 7,682 336 66 39,245 8 10,365 17,143 2,412 1,233 7,682 336 66 39,245 9 1,037 26,472 241 1,972 7,124 66 36,910 10 1,037 26,472 241 1,972 7,124 66 36,910 11 1,037 26,472 241 1,972 7,124 66 36,910 12 1,037 26,472 241 740 7,124 66 35,678 13 177 4,515 241 4,931 1,270 35,715 66 46,913 14 10,365 17,143 2,316 2,466 7,657 2,350 34 66 42,396 15 10,365 17,143 2,316 2,466 7,657 34 66 40,046 Note: The Airshow vehicles listed include resident and transient vehicles that are attending the show and will start their evacuation trip from the air base.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

7 GENERAL POPULATION EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES (ETE)

This section presents the ETE results of the computer analyses using the DYNEV II System described in Appendices B, C and D. These results cover 17 regions within the CCNPP EPZ and the 15 Evacuation Scenarios discussed in Section 6.

The ETE for all Evacuation Cases are presented in Table 71 and Table 72. These tables present the estimated times to clear the indicated population percentages from the Evacuation Regions for all Evacuation Scenarios. The ETE of the 2mile region in both staged and unstaged regions are presented in Table 73 and Table 74. Table 75 defines the Evacuation Regions considered.

The tabulated values of ETE are obtained from the DYNEV II System outputs which are generated at 5minute intervals.

7.1 Voluntary Evacuation and Shadow Evacuation Voluntary evacuees are people within the EPZ in zones for which an Advisory to Evacuate has not been issued, yet who elect to evacuate. Shadow evacuation is the voluntary outward movement of some people from the Shadow Region (outside the EPZ) for whom no protective action recommendation has been issued. Both voluntary and shadow evacuations are assumed to take place over the same time frame as the evacuation from within the impacted Evacuation Region.

The ETE for the CCNPP EPZ addresses the issue of voluntary evacuees in the manner shown in Figure 71. Within the EPZ, 20 percent of people located in zones outside of the evacuation region who are not advised to evacuate, are assumed to elect to evacuate. Similarly, it is assumed that 20 percent of those people in the Shadow Region will choose to leave the area.

Figure 72 presents the area identified as the Shadow Region. This region extends radially from the plant to cover a region between the EPZ boundary and approximately 15 miles. The population and number of evacuating vehicles in the Shadow Region were estimated using the same methodology that was used for permanent residents within the EPZ (see Section 3.1). As discussed in Section 3.2, it is estimated that a total of 67,630 people reside in the Shadow Region; 20 percent of them would evacuate. See Table 64 for the number of evacuating vehicles from the Shadow Region.

Traffic generated within this Shadow Region, traveling away from the CCNPP location, has the potential for impeding evacuating vehicles from within the Evacuation Region. All ETE calculations include this shadow traffic movement.

7.2 Staged Evacuation As defined in NUREG/CR7002, staged evacuation consists of the following:

1. Zones comprising the 2 mile region are advised to evacuate immediately.

2. Zones comprising regions extending from 2 to 5 miles downwind are advised to shelter inplace while the two mile region is cleared.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

3. As vehicles evacuate the 2 mile region, people from 2 to 5 miles downwind continue preparation for evacuation while they shelter.

4. The population sheltering in the 2 to 5 mile region is advised to evacuate when approximately 90% of the 2 mile region evacuating traffic crosses the 2 mile region boundary.

5. Noncompliance with the shelter recommendation is the same as the shadow evacuation percentage of 20%.

See Section 5.4.2 for additional information on staged evacuation.

7.3 Patterns of Traffic Congestion during Evacuation Figure 73 through Figure 78 illustrate the patterns of traffic congestion that arise for the case when the entire EPZ (Region R03) is advised to evacuate during the summer, midweek, midday period under good weather conditions (Scenario 1).

Traffic congestion, as the term is used here, is defined as Level of Service (LOS) F. LOS F is defined as follows (HCM 2010, page 55):

The HCM uses LOS F to define operations that have either broken down (i.e., demand exceeds capacity) or have exceeded a specified service measure value, or combination of service measure values, that most users would consider unsatisfactory. However, particularly for planning applications where different alternatives may be compared, analysts may be interested in knowing just how bad the LOS F condition is. Several measures are available to describe individually, or in combination, the severity of a LOS F condition:

• Demandtocapacity ratios describe the extent to which capacity is exceeded during the analysis period (e.g., by 1%, 15%, etc.);

• Duration of LOS F describes how long the condition persists (e.g., 15 min, 1 h, 3 h); and

• Spatial extent measures describe the areas affected by LOS F conditions. These include measures such as the back of que, and the identification of the specific intersection approaches or system elements experiencing LOS F conditions.

All highway "links" which experience LOS F are delineated in these figures by a thick red line; all others are lightly indicated. Congestion develops rapidly around concentrations of population and traffic bottlenecks. Figure 73 displays the developing congestion within the population centers of Lusby and Chesapeake Ranch Estates - Drum Point to the south of CCNPP, and also on MD 235 near Hollywood and California, just 30 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate (ATE).

MD 2/4 south of CCNPP is LOS F. This congestion is a product a reduction in roadway capacity as MD 2/4 changes from a 2 lanes to a single lane road just before the Thomas Johnson Bridge.

Also, bottlenecks develop at the intersections of MD 264 and MD 2/4, and also MD 2/4 and MD 765 near Prince Frederick.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

At one hour and 30 minutes after the ATE, Figure 74 displays fullydeveloped congestion within Lusby, Chesapeake Ranch Estates - Drum Point, and California. Notice that the bottlenecks have further developed and extended throughout the roadway network, the congestion at MD 765 and MD 2/4 being the most prevalent. MD 235 sees sporadic LOS F congestion as vehicles are making their way north, away from evacuating Zones 6 and 7. A bottleneck develops within the shadow region at the intersection of MD 245 and McIntosh Rd, as vehicles try and avoid congestion on MD 235 and exit the EPZ to the west. The confluence of the congestion in the communities of Lusby, Chesapeake Ranch Estates - Drum Point, and California is clearly impacting the rate of travel out of Zones 3 and 7.

At 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />, as shown in Figure 75, the intense congestion within the population centers of Lusby and Chesapeake Ranch Estates - Drum Point persists due to the bottle neck before the Thomas Johnson Bridge on MD 2/4. MD 2/4 north of the intersection with MD 497 experiences LOS A until the EPZ boundary due to the ample roadway capacity and limited vehicular demand.

Evacuees south of CCNPP are directed to evacuate south over the Thomas Johnson bridge creating an excess in vehicular demand and shortage in roadway capacity, resulting in heavy congestion. The bottleneck at the intersection of MD 264 and MD 2/4 persists as evacuees from Zones 2 and 4 are forced into a single acceleration lane to merge onto MD 2/4. Congestion has regressed along MD 235 as evacuees were able to exit relatively quickly, due to the limited amount of congestion along MD 235. Another bottleneck occurs at the intersection of MD 4 and MD 5 as vehicles exiting Zone 7 meet up with vehicles evacuating north along MD 5 within the shadow region.

Congested conditions remain in the Lusby/Chesapeake Ranch Estates - Drum Point area to the south at 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> after the ATE (Figure 76). Again, this is due to high demand and the drop in roadway capacity prior to the Thomas Johnson Bridge.

It is not until 7:55 when the congestion in Lusby/Chesapeake Ranch Estates - Drum Point completely dissipates. This is also when the 5mile ring is cleared of congestion as showed in Figure 77. LOS F conditions remain on MD 2/4 as vehicles are forced to travel over the single lane Thomas Johnson Bridge. Finally, Figure 78 displays an EPZ that is completely clear of congestion, at 8:35 after the ATE. At this time, the entire roadway network experiences LOS A except for MD 5 which experiences LOS B as the remaining vehicles make their way over the Thomas Johnson Bridge and exit the EPZ heading towards Leonardtown.

7.4 Evacuation Rates Evacuation is a continuous process, as implied by Figure 79 through Figure 723. These figures indicate the rate at which traffic flows out of the indicated areas for the case of an evacuation of the full EPZ (Region R03) under the indicated conditions. One figure is presented for each scenario considered.

As indicated in Figure 79, there is typically a long "tail" to these distributions. Vehicles begin to evacuate an area slowly at first, as people respond to the ATE at different rates. Then traffic demand builds rapidly (slopes of curves increase). When the system becomes congested, traffic exits the EPZ at rates somewhat below capacity until some evacuation routes have cleared. As Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 73 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

more routes clear, the aggregate rate of egress slows since many vehicles have already left the EPZ. Towards the end of the process, relatively few evacuation routes service the remaining demand.

This decline in aggregate flow rate, towards the end of the process, is characterized by these curves flattening and gradually becoming horizontal. Ideally, it would be desirable to fully saturate all evacuation routes equally so that all will service traffic near capacity levels and all will clear at the same time. For this ideal situation, all curves would retain the same slope until the end - thus minimizing evacuation time. In reality, this ideal is generally unattainable reflecting the spatial variation in population density, mobilization rates and in highway capacity over the EPZ.

7.5 Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) Results Table 71 and Table 72 present the ETE values for all 17 Evacuation Regions and all 15 Evacuation Scenarios. Table 73 and Table 74 present the ETE values for the 2Mile region for both staged and unstaged keyhole regions downwind to 5 miles. The tables are organized as follows:

Table Contents ETE represents the elapsed time required for 90 percent of the 71 population within a Region, to evacuate from that Region. All Scenarios are considered, as well as Staged Evacuation scenarios.

ETE represents the elapsed time required for 100 percent of the 72 population within a Region, to evacuate from that Region. All Scenarios are considered, as well as Staged Evacuation scenarios.

ETE represents the elapsed time required for 90 percent of the 73 population within the 2mile Region, to evacuate from that Region with both Concurrent and Staged Evacuations.

ETE represents the elapsed time required for 100 percent of the 74 population within the 2mile Region, to evacuate from that Region with both Concurrent and Staged Evacuations.

The animation snapshots described above reflect the ETE statistics for the concurrent (un staged) evacuation scenarios and regions, which are displayed in Figure 73 through Figure 78.

Most of the congestion is located in Zone 3 which is included within the5mile area; this is reflected in the ETE statistics:

The 90th percentile ETE for Region R01 (2mile area) are generally between 4 and 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> shorter than R02 (5mile area) this is because R01 does not include the evacuation of the high population of Zone 3 The 90th percentile ETE for Regions R03 (full EPZ) and R07 - R14 (which extend to the EPZ boundary) are interestingly shorter than that of R02. This is due to the heaviest Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 74 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

congestion being in the 5mile area. Those evacuees caught in the congestion are proportionately more significant to R02 than the more populous R03. The last 10% of R02 vehicles are still inside the region, while less than 10% of R03vehicles are still inside that region.

The 100th percentile ETE for all Regions and for all Scenarios, except for Region R01 and Region R04, extend far beyond the mobilization time. The congestion that develops from evacuating the 5mile area prolongs ETE by up to 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> and 35 minutes after 100 percent of the population has mobilized. Region R01 and Region R04 involve the evacuation of single zones, Zone 1 and Zone 8, respectively. This fact implies that the congestion that is associated with the evacuation of Zones 2 & 3 has a significant effect on ETE.

Comparison of Scenarios 3 and 13 in Table 71 indicates that the Special Event - Naval Air Station Patuxent River Air Show - significantly increases the ETE for the 90th percentile for regions which include the combination of the 5mile area and Zones 6 and/or 7. Conversely, since the special event attracts 75% of the EPZ and Shadow population, it significantly reduces ETE for regions that dont include the evacuation of Zones 6 or 7. Due to the geographical location of the special event, when evacuating Zones 6 or 7, those additional vehicles slow evacuation along MD 235 which in turn prolongs ETE. The 90 percentile ETE for R01 is lowest in the Airshow scenario because, with many residents out of Zone 1, the 90 percentile mobilization time is closer to that of the weekend transients that are in the area.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 14 in Table 71 indicates that the second Special Event - New Plant Construction - has little impact on the ETE for the 90th or 100th percentile. The additional vehicles present for this special event can evacuate north on MD 2/4 where there is little are no congestion for most of the evacuation, thus yielding similar evacuation times as Scenario 1, which shares the same scenario characteristics.

Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 15 in Table 71 indicates that the roadway closure - closure of the Thomas Johnson Bridge - does have a significant impact on 90th percentile ETE for evacuation regions which include Zone 3, with up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 45 minute decrease in ETE.

Closure of the bridge causes the population in Zone 3 to evacuate north on MD 2/4 past the plant. By avoiding the bottleneck prior to the Thomas Johnson Bridge (caused by the reduction in capacity at the lane drop) the high population of Zone 3 is able to evacuate almost 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> faster than when they evacuate south over the bridge. The only regions that experience an increase in ETE are those that do not involve Zone 3 (Region R01, Region R06 and the staged Region R17). The assumed 20% voluntarilyevacuating vehicles, from zones that are not told to evacuate, add additional vehicles to the roadway network, which, in turn increases ETE.

Although the ETE are reduced when vehicles are prohibited from using the Thomas Johnson Bridge, the rerouting that occurs brings evacuees within 2 miles of the CCNPP, which depending on the condition of the reactor may be dangerous. All efforts should be made to remove any blockage on the Thomas Johnson Bridge, to allow vehicles to evacuate away from the incident.

The capacity across the bridge could be increased, and the ETE reduced, by implementing a contraflow lane, as detailed in a sensitivity study in Appendix M.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 75 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

7.6 Staged Evacuation Results Table 73 and Table 74 present a comparison of the ETE compiled for the concurrent (un staged) and staged evacuation studies. Note that Regions R15 through R17 are the same geographic areas as Regions R05, R02 and R06, respectively.

To determine whether the staged evacuation strategy is worthy of consideration, one must show that the ETE for the 2 Mile region can be reduced without significantly affecting the region between 2 miles and 5 miles. As shown in these tables, the ETE for the 2 mile region increases, in almost all cases, with staged evacuation. In addition, comparing Regions R15, R16 and R17 with R05, R02 and R06 in Table 71 shows that staging negatively impacts the ETE for the 2 to 5 mile.

In summary, the staged evacuation protective action strategy provides no benefits and adversely impacts evacuees located beyond 2 miles from the CCNPP.

7.7 Guidance on Using ETE Tables The user first determines the percentile of population for which the ETE is sought (The NRC guidance calls for the 90th percentile). The applicable value of ETE within the chosen Table may then be identified using the following procedure:

1. Identify the applicable Scenario:

• Season Summer Winter (also Autumn and Spring)

• Day of Week Midweek Weekend

• Time of Day Midday Evening

• Weather Condition Good Weather Rain Snow

• Special Event The Naval Air Station Patuxent River Air Show New Plant Construction Road Closure (Closure of the Thomas Johnson Bridge)

• Evacuation Staging No, Staged Evacuation is not considered Yes, Staged Evacuation is considered While these Scenarios are designed, in aggregate, to represent conditions throughout the year, some further clarification is warranted:

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 76 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

• The conditions of a summer evening (either midweek or weekend) and rain are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (2) and (4) apply.

• The conditions of a winter evening (either midweek or weekend) and rain are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (7) and (10) for rain apply.

• The conditions of a winter evening (either midweek or weekend) and snow are not explicitly identified in the Tables. For these conditions, Scenarios (8) and (11) for snow apply.

• The seasons are defined as follows:

Summer assumes that public schools are not in session.

Winter (includes Spring and Autumn) considers that public schools are in session.

• Time of Day: Midday implies the time over which most commuters are at work or are travelling to/from work.

2. With the desired percentile ETE and Scenario identified, now identify the Evacuation Region:

• Determine the projected azimuth direction of the plume (coincident with the wind direction). This direction is expressed in terms of compass orientation: from N, NNE, NE,

• Determine the distance that the Evacuation Region will extend from the nuclear power plant. The applicable distances and their associated candidate Regions are given below:

2 Miles (Region R01)

To 5 Miles (Region R02, R05 and R06)

To EPZ Boundary (Regions R03, R07 through R14)

• Enter Table 75 and identify the applicable group of candidate Regions based on the distance that the selected Region extends from the CCNPP. Select the Evacuation Region identifier in that row, based on the azimuth direction of the plume, from the first column of the Table.

3. Determine the ETE Table based on the percentile selected. Then, for the Scenario identified in Step 1 and the Region identified in Step 2, proceed as follows:

• The columns of Table 71 are labeled with the Scenario numbers. Identify the proper column in the selected Table using the Scenario number defined in Step 1.

• Identify the row in this table that provides ETE values for the Region identified in Step 2.

• The unique data cell defined by the column and row so determined contains the desired value of ETE expressed in Hours:Minutes.

Example It is desired to identify the ETE for the following conditions:

• Sunday, August 10th at 4:00 AM.

• It is raining.

• Wind direction is from the east (E).

• Wind speed is such that the distance to be evacuated is judged to be a 5mile radius Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 77 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

and downwind to 10 miles (to EPZ boundary).

• The desired ETE is that value needed to evacuate 90 percent of the population from within the impacted Region.

• A staged evacuation is not desired.

Table 71 is applicable because the 90th percentile ETE is desired. Proceed as follows:

1. Identify the Scenario as summer, weekend, evening and raining. Entering Table 71, it is seen that there is no match for these descriptors. However, the clarification given above assigns this combination of circumstances to Scenario 4.

2. Enter Table 75 and locate the Region described as Evacuate 5Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary for wind direction from the E (toward the W) and read Region R10 in the first column of that row.

3. Enter Table 71 to locate the data cell containing the value of ETE for Scenario 4 and Region R10. This data cell is in column (4) and in the row for Region R10; it contains the ETE value of 8:20.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 78 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 71. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 90 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good New Roadway Rain Rain Rain Snow Rain Snow Airshow Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Plant Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 2:20 2:25 2:10 2:20 2:05 2:20 2:25 3:00 2:10 2:20 2:50 2:05 1:30 2:10 2:30 R02 7:00 7:55 7:45 8:35 6:25 6:40 7:20 8:20 6:40 7:20 8:15 6:10 3:15 7:00 5:20 R03 6:20 7:05 6:55 7:50 5:40 6:05 6:40 7:15 6:00 6:30 7:20 5:35 9:30 6:15 5:35 Dorchester County R04 2:25 2:30 2:00 2:00 2:15 2:35 2:35 3:15 2:10 2:10 2:45 2:20 1:25 2:25 2:25 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R05 7:20 7:55 8:00 8:50 6:35 6:50 7:35 8:35 6:50 7:35 8:35 6:25 3:20 7:10 5:10 R06 2:25 2:30 2:10 2:15 2:10 2:25 2:30 3:05 2:10 2:15 2:50 2:10 1:35 2:35 2:45 5Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R07 6:50 7:35 7:25 8:20 6:10 6:35 7:20 7:50 6:25 7:00 7:55 6:00 9:35 6:50 5:05 R08 6:45 7:30 7:15 8:00 6:00 6:25 7:05 7:40 6:15 6:50 7:45 5:55 9:35 6:30 5:00 R09 6:30 7:10 7:00 8:00 5:50 6:10 6:50 7:25 6:05 6:40 7:30 5:40 9:30 6:20 5:25 R10 7:00 7:35 7:40 8:20 6:15 6:40 7:15 8:15 6:35 7:15 8:10 6:05 9:00 6:55 5:35 R11 6:55 7:40 7:30 8:15 6:15 6:35 7:10 8:05 6:35 7:10 8:05 6:00 9:05 6:50 5:40 R12 6:40 7:35 7:30 8:15 6:05 6:25 7:05 7:55 6:25 7:00 7:55 5:55 3:10 6:40 5:55 R13 7:00 7:45 7:40 8:25 6:15 6:35 7:15 8:10 6:30 7:15 8:10 6:05 3:15 6:55 5:25 R14 7:00 7:55 7:45 8:30 6:20 6:40 7:20 8:20 6:40 7:20 8:15 6:10 3:10 7:00 5:20 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R15 7:10 7:50 7:50 8:30 6:40 6:45 7:45 8:20 6:50 7:40 8:40 6:40 3:10 6:55 5:25 R16 6:55 7:40 7:40 8:30 6:30 6:35 7:30 8:05 6:45 7:30 8:25 6:30 3:10 6:45 5:20 R17 3:10 3:10 3:00 3:05 3:05 3:10 3:10 3:50 3:00 3:10 3:45 3:05 2:00 2:55 3:25 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 79 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 72. Time to Clear the Indicated Area of 100 Percent of the Affected Population Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good New Roadway Rain Rain Rain Snow Rain Snow Airshow Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Plant Impact Entire 2Mile Region, 5Mile Region, and EPZ R01 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 R02 8:30 9:25 9:15 10:05 7:35 8:00 8:45 9:55 7:55 8:45 9:50 7:25 5:05 8:35 6:10 R03 8:55 9:50 9:30 10:35 7:55 8:30 9:20 10:15 8:15 9:00 10:10 7:45 12:25 8:55 6:55 Dorchester County R04 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:15 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R05 8:30 9:15 9:15 10:05 7:35 8:00 8:45 9:55 7:55 8:45 9:50 7:25 5:05 8:30 6:00 R06 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:10 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5Mile Region and Keyhole to EPZ Boundary R07 8:45 9:45 9:25 10:25 7:50 8:25 9:20 10:10 8:10 8:55 10:05 7:40 12:15 8:55 6:10 R08 8:55 9:50 9:30 10:25 7:55 8:30 9:20 10:15 8:10 9:00 10:10 7:45 12:25 8:55 6:10 R09 8:55 9:50 9:30 10:35 7:55 8:30 9:20 10:15 8:10 9:00 10:10 7:45 12:25 8:55 6:45 R10 8:45 9:25 9:30 10:20 7:50 8:15 9:05 10:15 8:10 9:00 10:10 7:40 12:10 8:50 6:45 R11 8:45 9:45 9:25 10:20 7:50 8:20 9:05 10:15 8:15 9:00 10:10 7:35 12:15 8:50 6:45 R12 8:20 9:30 9:15 10:10 7:40 8:00 8:50 9:55 8:00 8:45 9:55 7:25 5:10 8:35 6:40 R13 8:30 9:25 9:15 10:10 7:35 8:00 8:50 9:55 7:55 8:45 9:55 7:25 5:10 8:35 6:15 R14 8:20 9:25 9:15 10:05 7:35 8:00 8:45 9:55 7:55 8:45 9:50 7:25 5:10 8:35 6:10 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5 Miles R15 8:15 9:05 9:05 9:50 7:40 7:50 8:55 9:35 7:50 8:50 9:55 7:40 5:05 8:15 6:20 R16 8:15 9:05 9:05 10:00 7:40 7:50 8:55 9:35 8:00 8:50 9:55 7:40 5:05 8:15 6:20 R17 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:15 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 710 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 73. Time to Clear 90 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good New Roadway Rain Rain Rain Snow Rain Snow Airshow Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Plant Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2 and 5Mile Regions R01 2:20 2:25 2:10 2:20 2:05 2:20 2:25 3:00 2:10 2:20 2:50 2:05 1:30 2:10 2:30 R02 3:05 3:15 3:25 3:55 2:45 3:00 3:05 3:35 2:45 3:00 3:25 2:30 1:30 2:50 5:15 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R05 2:55 3:20 3:30 3:55 2:40 3:00 3:05 3:35 2:50 3:05 3:30 2:30 1:30 2:45 5:10 R06 2:20 2:25 2:05 2:15 2:05 2:20 2:25 3:00 2:05 2:20 2:50 2:05 1:30 2:15 2:35 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles, 5mile Region (R16)

R15 3:40 3:55 3:45 4:00 3:40 3:40 4:00 4:25 3:45 3:55 4:30 3:50 1:55 3:35 5:25 R16 3:45 3:50 3:45 3:50 3:35 3:35 3:55 4:20 3:40 3:45 4:25 3:35 1:55 3:30 5:25 R17 2:35 2:35 2:30 2:35 2:35 2:35 2:35 3:15 2:35 2:35 3:15 2:35 1:50 2:30 3:00 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 711 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 74. Time to Clear 100 Percent of the 2Mile Area within the Indicated Region Summer Summer Summer Winter Winter Winter Summer Summer Summer Midweek Midweek Midweek Weekend Midweek Weekend Weekend Midweek Midweek Weekend Weekend Scenario: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15)

Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Evening Midday Midday Midday Region Good Good Good Good Good Good New Roadway Rain Rain Rain Snow Rain Snow Airshow Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Weather Plant Impact Unstaged Evacuation 2 and 5Mile Regions R01 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:00 5:00 5:05 5:05 R02 5:05 5:10 5:05 5:15 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:30 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:05 Unstaged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles R05 5:05 5:20 5:05 5:40 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:10 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:00 R06 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Region and Keyhole to 5Miles, 5mile Region (R16)

R15 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:25 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:55 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:20 R16 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:20 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:40 5:05 5:05 5:05 6:15 R17 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:35 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 5:05 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 712 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 75. Description of Evacuation Regions Zone Region Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R01 2Mile Radius x R02 5Mile Radius x x x R03 Full EPZ x x x x x x x x R04 Dorchester County x Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to 5 Miles Zone Region Wind Direction From: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R05 NW, NNW, N, NNE x x N/A NE Refer to Region R02 R06 ENE, E, ESE, SE, SSE x x S, SSW, SW, WSW, W, N/A WNW Refer to Region R01 Evacuate 5Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R07 N x x x x R08 NNE, NE x x x x x R09 ENE x x x x x x R10 E x x x x x R11 ESE x x x x x x R12 SE, SSE x x x x x R13 S x x x x R14 SW, WSW, W, WNW x x x x N/A SSW, NW, NNW Refer to Region R02 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Zone Region Wind Direction From: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R15 NW, NNW, N, NNE x x R16 NE, x x x R17 ENE, E, ESE, SE, SSE x x S, SSW, SW, WSW,W, N/A WNW Refer to Region R01 ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, Zone(s) ShelterinPlace Zone(s) then Evacuate Evacuate Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 713 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 71. Voluntary Evacuation Methodology Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 714 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 72. CCNPP Shadow Region Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 715 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 73. Congestion Patterns at 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 716 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 74. Congestion Patterns at 1 Hour, 30 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 717 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 75. Congestion Patterns at 3 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 718 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 76. Congestion Patterns at 4 Hours after the Advisory to Evacuate Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 719 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 77. Congestion Patterns at 7 Hours, 55 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 720 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 78. Congestion Patterns at 8 Hours, 35 Minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 721 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 1) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 79. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 1 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 710. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 2 for Region R03 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 722 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 3) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 711. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 3 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 712. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 4 for Region R03 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 723 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 5) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 713. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 5 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 6) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 714. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 6 for Region R03 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 724 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 715. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 7 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Midday, Snow (Scenario 8) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 716. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 8 for Region R03 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 725 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 9) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 717. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 9 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 10) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 718. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 10 for Region R03 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 726 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Weekend, Midday, Snow (Scenario 11) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 719. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 11 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 12) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 720. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 12 for Region R03 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 727 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good, Airshow (Scenario 13) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 721. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 13 for Region R03 Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good, New Plant (Scenario 14) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 722. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 14 for Region R03 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 728 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Evacuation Time Estimates Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 15) 2Mile Region 5Mile Region Entire EPZ 90% 100%

40 35 Vehicles Evacuating 30 25 20 (Thousands) 15 10 5

0 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 Elapsed Time After Evacuation Recommendation (min)

Figure 723. Evacuation Time Estimates Scenario 15 for Region R03 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 729 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

8 TRANSITDEPENDENT AND SPECIAL FACILITY EVACUATION TIME ESTIMATES This section details the analyses applied and the results obtained in the form of evacuation time estimates for transit vehicles. The demand for transit service reflects the needs of three population groups: (1) residents with no vehicles available; (2) residents of special facilities such as schools, a; and (3) homebound special needs population.

These transit vehicles mix with the general evacuation traffic that is comprised mostly of passenger cars (pcs). The presence of each transit vehicle in the evacuating traffic stream is represented within the modeling paradigm described in Appendix D as equivalent to two pcs.

This equivalence factor represents the longer size and more sluggish operating characteristics of a transit vehicle, relative to those of a pc.

Transit vehicles must be mobilized in preparation for their respective evacuation missions.

Specifically:

• Bus drivers must be alerted

• They must travel to the bus depot

• They must be briefed there and assigned to a route or facility These activities consume time. Based on discussion with the offsite agencies, it is estimated that bus mobilization time will average approximately 90 minutes extending from the Advisory to Evacuate, to the time when buses first arrive at the facility to be evacuated.

During this mobilization period, other mobilization activities are taking place. One of these is the action taken by parents, neighbors, relatives and friends to pick up children from school prior to the arrival of buses, so that they may join their families. Virtually all studies of evacuations have concluded that this bonding process of uniting families is universally prevalent during emergencies and should be anticipated in the planning process. The current public information disseminated to residents of the CCNPP EPZ indicates that schoolchildren will be evacuated to host schools at emergency action levels of Site Area Emergency or higher, and that parents should pick schoolchildren up at host schools. As discussed in Section 2, this study assumes a fast breaking general emergency. Therefore, children are evacuated to host schools. Picking up children at school could add to traffic congestion at the schools, delaying the departure of the buses evacuating schoolchildren, which may have to return in a subsequent wave to the EPZ to evacuate the transitdependent population. This report provides estimates of buses under the assumption that no children will be picked up by their parents (in accordance with NUREG/CR7002), to present an upper bound estimate of buses required. It is assumed that children at daycare centers are picked up by parents or guardians and that the time to perform this activity is included in the trip generation times discussed in Section 5.

The procedure for computing transitdependent ETE is to:

• Estimate demand for transit service

• Estimate time to perform all transit functions Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 81 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

• Estimate route travel times to the EPZ boundary and to the reception centers 8.1 Transit Dependent People Demand Estimate The telephone survey (see Appendix F) results were used to estimate the portion of the population requiring transit service:

• Those persons in households that do not have a vehicle available.

• Those persons in households that do have vehicle(s) that would not be available at the time the evacuation is advised.

In the latter group, the vehicle(s) may be used by a commuter(s) who does not return (or is not expected to return) home to evacuate the household.

Table 81 presents estimates of transitdependent people. Note:

• Estimates of persons requiring transit vehicles include schoolchildren. For those evacuation scenarios where children are at school when an evacuation is ordered, separate transportation is provided for the schoolchildren. The actual need for transit vehicles by residents is thereby less than the given estimates. However, estimates of transit vehicles are not reduced when schools are in session.

• It is reasonable and appropriate to consider that many transitdependent persons will evacuate by ridesharing with neighbors, friends or family. For example, nearly 80 percent of those who evacuated from Mississauga, Ontario who did not use their own cars, shared a ride with neighbors or friends. Other documents report that approximately 70 percent of transit dependent persons were evacuated via ride sharing. We will adopt a conservative estimate that 50 percent of transit dependent persons will ride share, in accordance with NUREG/CR7002.

The estimated number of bus trips needed to service transitdependent persons is based on an estimate of average bus occupancy of 30 persons at the conclusion of the bus run. Transit vehicle seating capacities typically equal or exceed 60 children on average (roughly equivalent to 40 adults). If transit vehicle evacuees are two thirds adults and one third children, then the number of adult seats taken by 30 persons is 20 + (2/3 x10) = 27. On this basis, the average load factor anticipated is (27/40) x 100 = 68 percent. Thus, if the actual demand for service exceeds the estimates of Table 81 by 50 percent, the demand for service can still be accommodated by the available bus seating capacity.

2 20 10 40 1.5 1.00 3

Table 81 indicates that transportation must be provided for 947 people. Therefore, a total of 32 bus runs are required to transport this population to reception centers. However, to provide at least one bus per bus route, 33 buses are needed.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 82 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

To illustrate this estimation procedure, we calculate the number of persons, P, requiring public transit or rideshare, and the number of buses, B, required for the CCNPP EPZ:

Where, A = Percent of households with commuters C = Percent of households who will not await the return of a commuter 18,804 0.0255 1.50 0.222 1.64 1 0.65 0.42 0.393 2.81 2 0.65 0.42 18,804 .1007 1,894 0.5 30 32 These calculations are explained as follows:

• All members (1.50 avg.) of households (HH) with no vehicles (2.55 %) will evacuate by public transit or rideshare. The term 18,804 (number of households) x 0.0255 x 1.50, accounts for these people.

• The members of HH with 1 vehicle away (22.2%), who are at home, equal (1.641).

The number of HH where the commuter will not return home is equal to (18,804 x 0.222 x 0.65 x 0.42), as 65% of EPZ households have a commuter, 42% of which would not return home in the event of an emergency. The number of persons who will evacuate by public transit or rideshare is equal to the product of these two terms.

• The members of HH with 2 vehicles that are away (39.3%), who are at home, equal (2.81 - 2). The number of HH where neither commuter will return home is equal to 18,804 x 0.393 x (0.65 x 0.42)2. The number of persons who will evacuate by public transit or rideshare is equal to the product of these two terms (the last term is squared to represent the probability that neither commuter will return).

• Households with 3 or more vehicles are assumed to have no need for transit vehicles.

• The total number of persons requiring public transit is the sum of such people in HH with no vehicles, or with 1 or 2 vehicles that are away from home.

The estimate of transitdependent population in Table 81 far exceeds the number of registered transitdependent persons in the EPZ as provided by the counties (discussed below in Section 8.5). This is consistent with the findings of NUREG/CR6953, Volume 2, in that a large majority of the transitdependent population within the EPZs of U.S. nuclear plants does not register with their local emergency response agency.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 83 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

8.2 School Population - Transit Demand Table 82 presents the school population and transportation requirements for the direct evacuation of all schools within the EPZ for the 20112012 school year. This information was provided by the local county emergency management agencies. The column in Table 82 entitled Buses Required specifies the number of buses required for each school under the following set of assumptions and estimates:

• No students will be picked up by their parents prior to the arrival of the buses.

• While many high school students commute to school using private automobiles (as discussed in Section 2.4 of NUREG/CR7002), the estimate of buses required for school evacuation do not consider the use of these private vehicles.

• Bus capacity, expressed in students per bus, is set to 70 for primary schools and 50 for middle and high schools.

o Local data provided by Calvert County was used for the number of buses and capacities for each.

• Those staff members who do not accompany the students will evacuate in their private vehicles.

• No allowance is made for student absenteeism, typically 3 percent daily.

It is recommended that the counties in the EPZ introduce procedures whereby the schools are contacted prior to the dispatch of buses from the depot, to ascertain the current estimate of students to be evacuated. In this way, the number of buses dispatched to the schools will reflect the actual number needed. The need for buses would be reduced by any high school students who have evacuated using private automobiles (if permitted by school authorities).

Those buses originally allocated to evacuate schoolchildren that are not needed due to children being picked up by their parents, can be gainfully assigned to service other facilities or those persons who do not have access to private vehicles or to ridesharing.

Table 83 presents a list of the host schools for each school in the EPZ. Students will be transported to these schools where they will be subsequently retrieved by their respective families.

8.3 Medical Facility Demand Table 84 presents the census of medical facilities in the EPZ. 206 people have been identified as living in, or being treated in, these facilities. The capacity and current census for each facility were provided by the county emergency management agencies. This data includes the number of ambulatory, wheelchairbound and bedridden patients at each facility.

The transportation requirements for the medical facility population are also presented in Table

84. The number of ambulance runs is determined by assuming that 2 patients can be accommodated per ambulance trip; the number of bus runs estimated assumes 30 ambulatory patients per trip. There are a total of 129 persons who need transportation that is wheelchair accessible. According to Calvert County, there is a limited number of wheelchair accessible vehicles to accommodate these people. Although it is assumed that 2 patients can be Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 84 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

accommodated per ambulance trip, there was no data received confirming the number of ambulances for each county.

8.4 Evacuation Time Estimates for Transit Dependent People EPZ bus resources are assigned to evacuating schoolchildren (if school is in session at the time of the ATE) as the first priority in the event of an emergency. In the event that the allocation of buses dispatched from the depots to the various facilities and to the bus routes is somewhat inefficient, or if there is a shortfall of available drivers, then there may be a need for some buses to return to the EPZ from the reception center after completing their first evacuation trip, to complete a second wave of providing transport service to evacuees. For this reason, the ETE for the transitdependent population will be calculated for both a one wave transit evacuation and for two waves. Of course, if the impacted Evacuation Region is other than R03 (the entire EPZ), then there will likely be ample transit resources relative to demand in the impacted Region and this discussion of a second wave would likely not apply.

When school evacuation needs are satisfied, subsequent assignments of buses to service the transitdependent should be sensitive to their mobilization time. Clearly, the buses should be dispatched after people have completed their mobilization activities and are in a position to board the buses when they arrive at the pickup points.

Evacuation Time Estimates for transit trips were developed using both good weather and adverse weather conditions. Figure 81 presents the chronology of events relevant to transit operations. The elapsed time for each activity will now be discussed with reference to Figure 81.

Activity: Mobilize Drivers (ABC)

Mobilization is the elapsed time from the Advisory to Evacuate until the time the buses arrive at the facility to be evacuated. It is assumed that for a rapidly escalating radiological emergency with no observable indication before the fact, school bus drivers would likely require 90 minutes to be contacted, to travel to the depot, be briefed, and to travel to the transit dependent facilities. Mobilization time is slightly longer in adverse weather - 100 minutes when raining, 110 minutes when snowing.

Activity: Board Passengers (CD)

Based on discussions with offsite agencies, a loading time of 15 minutes (20 minutes for rain and 25 minutes for snow) for school buses is used.

For multiple stops along a pickup route (transitdependent bus routes) estimation of travel time must allow for the delay associated with stopping and starting at each pickup point. The time, t, required for a bus to decelerate at a rate, a, expressed in ft/sec/sec, from a speed, v, expressed in ft/sec, to a stop, is t = v/a. Assuming the same acceleration rate and final speed following the stop yields a total time, T, to service boarding passengers:

2 ,

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 85 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Where B = Dwell time to service passengers. The total distance, s in feet, travelled during the deceleration and acceleration activities is: s = v2/a. If the bus had not stopped to service passengers, but had continued to travel at speed, v, then its travel time over the distance, s, would be: s/v = v/a. Then the total delay (i.e. pickup time, P) to service passengers is:

Assigning reasonable estimates:

• B = 50 seconds: a generous value for a single passenger, carrying personal items, to board per stop

• v = 25 mph = 37 ft/sec

• a = 4 ft/sec/sec, a moderate average rate Then, P 1 minute per stop. Allowing 30 minutes pickup time per bus run implies 30 stops per run, for good weather. It is assumed that bus acceleration and speed will be less in rain; total loading time is 40 minutes per bus in rain, 50 minutes in snow.

Activity: Travel to EPZ Boundary (DE)

School Evacuation Transportation resources available were provided by the EPZ county emergency management agencies and are summarized in Table 85. Also included in the table are the number of buses needed to evacuate schools, medical facilities, transitdependent population, homebound special needs (discussed below in Section 8.5). Many of these resources are used for school evacuation only. According to data received there are ample resources to evacuate schools, but there is a short fall when it comes to evacuating the transit dependent population for Calvert County. According to Calvert County, they would have to depend on the State of Maryland for additional transportation resources for evacuation. Data on State transportation assets was not provided. Also, no information was provided on the number of ambulances available for evacuation; refer to Section 8.5 for a sample ETE calculation.

The buses servicing the schools are ready to begin their evacuation trips at 105 minutes after the advisory to evacuate - 90 minutes mobilization time plus 15 minutes loading time - in good weather. The UNITES software discussed in Section 1.3 was used to define bus routes along the most likely path from a school being evacuated to the EPZ boundary, traveling toward the appropriate school reception center. This is done in UNITES by interactively selecting the series of nodes from the school to the EPZ boundary. Each bus route is given an identification number and is written to the DYNEV II input stream. DYNEV computes the route length and outputs the average speed for each 5 minute interval, for each bus route. The specified bus routes are documented in Table 86 (refer to the maps of the linknode analysis network in Appendix K for node locations). Data provided by DYNEV during the appropriate timeframe depending on the mobilization and loading times (i.e., 100 to 105 minutes after the advisory to evacuate for good weather) were used to compute the average speed for each route, as follows:

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 86 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

60 .

1 .

. 60 .

. . 1 .

The average speed computed (using this methodology) for the buses servicing each of the schools in the EPZ is shown in Table 87 through Table 89 for school evacuation, and in Table 811 through Table 813 for the transit vehicles evacuating transitdependent persons, which are discussed later. The travel time to the EPZ boundary was computed for each bus using the computed average speed and the distance to the EPZ boundary along the most likely route out of the EPZ. The travel time from the EPZ boundary to the Reception Center was computed assuming an average speed of 50 mph, 45 mph, and 40 mph for good weather, rain and snow, respectively. Speeds were reduced in Table 87 through Table 89 and in Table 811 through Table 813 to 50 mph (45 mph for rain - 10% decrease - and 40 mph for snow - 20% decrease) for those calculated bus speeds which exceed 50 mph, as the school bus speed limit for state routes in Maryland is 50 mph.

Table 87 (good weather), Table 88 (rain) and Table 89 (snow) present the following evacuation time estimates (rounded up to the nearest 5 minutes) for schools in the EPZ: (1) The elapsed time from the Advisory to Evacuate until the bus exits the EPZ; and (2) The elapsed time until the bus reaches the Host School. The evacuation time out of the EPZ can be computed as the sum of times associated with Activities ABC, CD, and DE (For example: 90 min. + 15 + 136 = 4:05 for Appeal Elementary School, with good weather). The evacuation time to the School Reception Center is determined by adding the time associated with Activity EF (discussed below), to this EPZ evacua on me.

Evacuation of TransitDependent Population The buses dispatched from the depots to service the transitdependent evacuees will be scheduled so that they arrive at their respective routes after their passengers have completed their mobilization. As shown in Figure 54 (Residents with no Commuters), 90 percent of the evacuees will complete their mobilization when the buses will begin their routes, approximately 90 minutes after the Advisory to Evacuate. According to St. Marys County, their transit buses will need 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> to mobilize. This is why mobilization starts at 120 minutes instead of 90 minutes in Table 811 through Table 813.

Predesigned routes have been supplied by both St. Marys and Calvert Counties. There are a total of 17 routes which service Calvert County. There are 5 staging areas where buses will deploy from. Figure 82 shows the routes from staging areas to the EPZ boundary for Calvert County and the routes which serve Zones 6 and 7 for St. Marys County. Refer to Calvert County Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 87 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Emergency plans for a detailed map of the bus pickup runs that are associated with each staging area. In order to develop accurate ETE for these pickup runs, distances provided by Calvert County were used. The distance for each bus pickup run (which starts and ends at the staging area) was combined with the distance from the staging area to the EPZ boundary and an average speed along the route was applied to calculate the ETE.

According to the transitdependent demand within St. Marys County, only 2 routes, with multiple buses for each route, are needed to service the transitdependent population (see Table 810). If there is more than one round of buses deployed, then the headway are established between deployments of approximately 10 minutes. The Bus Number column in Table 811 through Table 813 shows the number of buses deployed for each round. Notice that St. Marys county has two rounds of bus deployment for Zone 7. The use of bus headways ensures that those people who take longer to mobilize will be picked up.

Mobilization time is 10 minutes longer in rain and 20 minutes longer for snow to account for slower travel speeds and reduced roadway capacity.

Those buses servicing the transitdependent evacuees will first travel along their pickup routes, then proceed out of the EPZ. As stated above, Calvert and St. Marys Counties buses will travel predesignated routes to pick up evacuees requiring transportation. It is assumed that residents will walk to and congregate at these predesignated pickup locations, and that they can arrive at the stops within the 90 minute bus mobilization time (good weather).

As previously discussed, a pickup time of 30 minutes (good weather) is estimated for 30 individual stops to pick up passengers, with an average of one minute of delay associated with each stop. A longer pickup time of 40 minutes and 50 minutes are used for rain and snow, respectively.

The travel distance along the respective pickup routes within the EPZ is estimated using the UNITES software. Bus travel times within the EPZ are computed using average speeds computed by DYNEV, using the aforementioned methodology that was used for school evacuation.

Table 811 through Table 813 present the transitdependent population evacuation time estimates for each bus route calculated using the above procedures for good weather, rain and snow, respectively.

For example, the ETE for the Calvert Beach Run (Route 1 in Table 811) is computed as 90 + 62 +

30 = 3:05 for good weather (rounded up to nearest 5 minutes). Here, 62 minutes is the time to travel 22.4 miles at 22.4 mph, the average speed output by the model for this route starting at 90 minutes. The ETE for a second wave (discussed below) is presented in the event there is a shortfall of available buses or bus drivers, as previously discussed.

Activity: Travel to Reception Centers (EF)

The distances from the EPZ boundary to the reception centers are measured using GIS software along the most likely route from the EPZ exit point to the reception center. The reception centers are mapped in Figure 101. For a onewave evacuation, this travel time outside the EPZ Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 88 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

does not contribute to the ETE. For a twowave evacuation, the ETE for buses must be considered separately, since it could exceed the ETE for the general population. Assumed bus speeds of 50 mph, 45 mph, and 40 mph for good weather, rain, and snow, respectively, will be applied for this activity for buses servicing the transitdependent population.

Activity: Passengers Leave Bus (FG)

A bus can empty within 5 minutes. The driver takes a 10 minute break.

Activity: Bus Returns to Route for Second Wave Evacuation (GC)

The buses assigned to return to the EPZ to perform a second wave evacuation of transit dependent evacuees will be those that have already evacuated transitdependent people who mobilized more quickly. The first wave of transitdependent people depart the bus, and the bus then returns to the EPZ, travels to its route and proceeds to pick up more transit dependent evacuees along the route. The travel time back to the EPZ is equal to the travel time to the reception center.

The secondwave ETE for the Calvert Beach Run is computed as follows for good weather:

• Bus arrives at reception center at 3:12 in good weather (3:05 to exit EPZ + 7 minute travel time to reception center).

• Bus discharges passengers (5 minutes) and driver takes a 10minute rest: 15 minutes.

• Bus returns to EPZ and completes second route: 7 minutes (equal to travel time to reception center) + time to return to the beginning of the route, 27 minutes (22.4 miles @ 50 mph) + time to complete outbound travel on route, 27 minutes (22.4 miles @ 50 mph)= 61 minutes

• Bus completes pickups along route: 30 minutes.

• Bus exits EPZ at time 3:05 + 0:07 + 0:15 + 1:01 + 0:30 = 5:00 (rounded to nearest 5 minutes) after the Advisory to Evacuate.

The ETE for the completion of the second wave for all transitdependent bus routes are provided in Table 811 through Table 813. The average ETE for a twowave evacuation of transitdependent people exceeds the ETE for the general population at the 90th percentile.

The relocation of transitdependent evacuees from the reception centers to mass care centers, if the counties decide to do so, is not considered in this study.

Evacuation of Medical Facilities The evacuation of these facilities is similar to school evacuation except:

• Buses are assigned on the basis of 30 patients to allow for staff to accompany the patients. According to data received, on average, buses have the capacity for 2 wheelchair bound persons. Ambulances can accommodate 2 patients.

• Loading times of 1 minute, 5 minutes, and 15 minutes per patient are assumed for ambulatory patients, wheelchair bound patients, and bedridden patients, respectively.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 89 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 84 indicates that 1 bus run, 66 wheelchair accessible bus runs and 5 ambulance runs are needed to service all of the medical facilities in the EPZ. The demand for buses for medical facilities could be significantly reduced if the capacity per bus for wheelchair bound patients could be increased. This could be achieved in the cases where patients are able to be helped into a regular seat once on the bus and the wheelchairs folded (if of foldable design) or seats removed, prior to dispatch, to make room for the wheelchairs. Considering the case of Asbury Solomons Island Assisted Living, 3 buses are needed based on the number of wheelchair bound patients. Those 3 buses have the capacity to carry approximately 78 ambulatory people (estimating a capacity reduction of 4 people for 2 wheelchairs), whereas the ambulatory census is only 15. This means there is excess capacity on each bus.

According to Table 85, a combination of private bus contractors, medical facilities, and the counties can collectively provide transportation with the capacity for 12,816 ambulatory persons, 156 wheelchair bound persons, and 1 bedridden person. Thus, there are sufficient resources to evacuate the ambulatory and wheelchair bound persons from the medical facilities in a single wave, but, based on the information provided, there is shortfall of ambulances to evacuate bedridden patients.

As is done for the schools, it is estimated that mobilization time averages 90 minutes. Specially trained medical support staff (working their regular shift) will be on site to assist in the evacuation of patients. Additional staff (if needed) could be mobilized over this same 90 minute timeframe.

Table 814 through Table 816 summarize the ETE for medical facilities within the EPZ for good weather, rain, and snow. Average speeds output by the model for Scenario 6 (Scenario 7 for rain and Scenario 8 for snow) Region 3, capped at 50 mph (45 mph for rain and 40 mph for snow), are used to compute travel time to EPZ boundary. The travel time to the EPZ boundary is computed by dividing the distance to the EPZ boundary by the average travel speed. The ETE is the sum of the mobilization time, total passenger loading time, and travel time out of the EPZ. Concurrent loading on multiple buses, wheelchair accessible buses, and ambulances at capacity is assumed such that the maximum loading times for buses, wheelchair accessible buses and ambulances are 30, 40 and 30 minutes, respectively. All ETE are rounded to the nearest 5 minutes. For example, the calculation of ETE for the 3 Beas Assisted Living with 4 ambulatory residents during good weather is:

ETE: 90 + (4 x 1) + (1 x 5) + 37 = 131 min. or 2:20 rounded to the nearest 5 minutes.

It is assumed that medical facility population is directly evacuated to appropriate host medical facilities. Relocation of this population to permanent facilities and/or passing through the reception center before arriving at the host facility are not considered in this analysis.

8.5 Special Needs Population The county emergency management agencies have a combined registration for transit dependent and homebound special needs persons. A listing of handicapped or special needs citizens residing within the CCNPP plume zone is maintained by the EM Director and is on file in Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 810 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

the EOC1.Based on data provided by the counties, there are an estimated 19 homebound special needs people within the Calvert County portion of the EPZ and 5 people within the St.

Marys County portion of the EPZ who require transportation assistance to evacuate. Overall, there are 22 people requiring wheelchair accessible transportation and 2 people requiring an ambulance.

ETE for Homebound Special Needs Persons Table 817 summarizes the ETE for homebound special needs people. The table is categorized by type of vehicle required and then broken down by weather condition. The table takes into consideration the deployment of multiple vehicles to reduce the number of stops per vehicle.

It is conservatively assumed that ambulatory and wheelchair bound special needs households are spaced 3 miles apart and bedridden households are spaced 5 miles apart. Bus speeds approximate 20 mph between households and ambulance speeds approximate 30 mph in good weather (10% slower in rain, 20% slower in snow). Mobilization times of 90 minutes were used (100 minutes for rain, and 110 minutes for snow). The last HH is assumed to be 5 miles from the EPZ boundary, and the networkwide average speed, capped at 50 mph (45 mph for rain and 40 mph for snow), after the last pickup is used to compute travel time. ETE is computed by summing mobilization time, loading time at first household, travel to subsequent households, loading time at subsequent households, and travel time to EPZ boundary. All ETE are rounded to the nearest 5 minutes.

For example, assuming no more than one special needs person per HH implies that 22 wheelchair bound households need to be serviced. If we are assuming each bus has a capacity for 2 wheelchairs, then 11 buses are needed and each would require 2 stops. The following outlines the ETE calculations:

1. Assume 11 buses are deployed, each with 2 stops, to service a total of 22 HH.

2. The ETE is calculated as follows:

a. Buses arrive at the first pickup location: 90 minutes

b. Load HH members at first pickup: 5 minutes

c. Travel to subsequent pickup locations: 1 @ 9 minutes = 9 minutes

d. Load HH members at subsequent pickup locations: 1 @ 5 minutes = 5 minutes

e. Travel to EPZ boundary: 17 minutes (5 miles @ 18.1 mph).

ETE: 90 + 5 + 9 + 5 + 17 = 2:10 rounded to the nearest 5 minutes 1

Calvert County Radiological Emergency Plan Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 811 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

(Subsequent Wave)

A B C D E F G Time Event A Advisory to Evacuate B Bus Dispatched from Depot C Bus Arrives at Facility/Pickup Route D Bus Departs for Reception Center E Bus Exits Region F Bus Arrives at Reception Center/Host Facility G Bus Available for Second Wave Evacuation Service Activity AB Driver Mobilization BC Travel to Facility or to Pickup Route CD Passengers Board the Bus DE Bus Travels Towards Region Boundary EF Bus Travels Towards Reception Center Outside the EPZ FG Passengers Leave Bus; Driver Takes a Break Figure 81. Chronology of Transit Evacuation Operations Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 812 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 82. TransitDependent Bus Routes Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 813 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 81. TransitDependent Population Estimates Survey Average HH Survey Percent Size Survey Percent HH Survey Percent HH Total People Population with Indicated No. of Estimated with Indicated No. of Percent HH with Non People Estimated Requiring Requiring 2010 EPZ Vehicles No. of Vehicles with Returning Requiring Ridesharing Public Public Population 0 1 2 Households 0 1 2 Commuters Commuters Transport Percentage Transit Transit 52,652 1.50 1.64 2.81 18,804 2.55% 22.2% 39.3% 65% 42% 1,894 50% 947 1.8%

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 814 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 82. School and Daycare Population Demand Estimates Buses Zone School/Daycare Name Enrollment Required 1 Southern Middle School 562 12 1 St. Leonard Elementary School 573 14 St. Leonard Elementary Before & After 1 15 1 School Program 1 St. Paul's Preschool 35 1 2 Grover's Place Day Care 59 1 2 Mutual Elementary School 510 14 Mutual Elementary Before & After 2 30 1 School Program 3 Appeal Elementary School 435 9 3 Dowell Elementary School 673 15 Dowell Elementary Before & After 3 30 1 School Program 3 Mill Creek Middle School 546 14 3 Our Lady Star of the Sea (ASC) 49 1 3 Our Lady Star of the Sea School 194 3 3 Patuxent Elementary School 500 10 Patuxent Elementary Before & After 3 30 1 School Program 3 Patuxent Head Start 79 2 3 Patuxent High School 1,123 28 3 Solomon's Day Care Center 86 2 7 Esperanza Middle School 775 16 7 Green Holly Elementary School 547 8 7 Hollywood Elementary School 525 8 7 St John's Elementary School 125 2 7 Town Creek Elementary School 231 4 TOTAL: 7,732 168 NOTE: Parents will pick up children from daycares that are not listed in this table.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 815 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 83. Host Schools School/Daycare Host School St. Pauls Preschool Beach Elementary School Mutual Elementary School Mutual Elementary Before & After Calvert Elementary School School Program Dowell Elementary School Calvert Middle School Esperanza Middle School Forrest Career Center and Technology Center Town Creek Elementary School Patuxent Elementary School Patuxent Elementary School Before &

After School Program Huntingtown Elementary School Our Lady Star of the Sea School Our Lady Star of the Sea (ASC)

Green Holly Elementary School Margaret Brent Middle School Hollywood Elementary School Patuxent High School Northern High School Southern Middle School Northern Middle School Appeal Elementary School Plum Point Elementary School Dowell Elementary Before & After School Program Plum Point Middle School Mill Creek Middle School St John's Elementary School St. Mary's Ryken Patuxent Head Start Grover's Place Day Care Sunderland Elementary School Solomon's Day Care Center St. Leonard Elementary St. Leonard Elementary Before & After Windy Hill Middle School School Program Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 816 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 84. Medical Facility Transit Demand Wheel Wheelchair Cap Current Ambu chair Bed Bus Accessible Zone Facility Name Municipality acity Census latory Bound ridden Runs Bus Runs Ambulance CALVERT COUNTY MEDICAL FACILITIES 1 3 Beas' Assisted Living Lusby 6 6 4 1 1 0 1 1 2 In God's Care, Inc. St. Leonard 6 5 5 0 0 1 0 0 Asbury Solomons Island Assisted 3 Solomons 30 21 15 6 0 0 3 0 Living Asbury Solomons Island Skilled 3 Solomons 48 41 13 27 1 0 14 1 Nursing Home 3 Solomons Nursing Center Inc. Solomons 87 84 8 70 6 0 35 3 The Hermitage at St. John's 3 Solomons 49 49 24 25 0 0 13 0 Creek Calvert County Subtotal: 226 206 69 129 8 1 66 5 TOTAL: 226 206 69 129 8 1 66 5 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 817 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 85. Summary of Transportation Resources Transportation Ambulatory Wheelchair Bedridden Resource Capacity Capacity Capacity Resources Available St. Mary's County STS Transit System 434 70 0 Dorchester County Board of 2,878 27 0 Education Delmarva Community Services 160 20 0 Bishop School Bus Service 234 0 0 Reid & Reid School Bus Service 132 0 0 Calvert County Government 311 34 0 Appeal Elementary Contractors 838 0 0 Dowell Elementary Contractors 960 0 0 Mill Creek Middle School Contractors 1,279 0 0 Mutual Elementary Contractors 1,191 0 0 Patuxent Elementary Contractors 810 0 0 Patuxent High School Contractors 1,399 0 0 Southern Middle School Contractors 819 0 0 St. Leonard School Contractors 1,240 0 0 St. Paul's Preschool Contractors 64 0 0 Hermitage at St. John's Creek &

36 0 0 Solomons Nursing Center Asbury Solomons Island Skilled 22 4 0 Nursing Home & Assisted Living In God's Care Inc. 5 0 0 3 Beas' Assisted Living 4 1 1 TOTAL: 12,816 156 1 Resources Needed Schools (Table 82): 7,732 0 0 Medical Facilities (Table 84): 69 66 8 TransitDependent Population 947 0 0 (Table 810):

Homebound Special Needs (Section 0 22 2 8.5):

TOTAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS: 8,754 88 10 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 818 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 86. Bus Route Descriptions Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 174, 7, 8, 491, 9, 486, 487, 10, 196, 198, 197, 568, 203, 11, 12, 13, 224, 14, 1 St Paul's Preschool 15, 578, 16, 68, 579, 69, 70, 431, 573, 312, 309, 71, 316, 318, 319, 570, 325, 73 Mutual Elementary School , Mutual Elementary 2 379, 566, 565, 142, 560, 22, 339, 436, 23, 25, 554, 340, 24 School Before & After School Program Dowell Elementary School, Dowell Elementary 195, 202, 198, 197, 568, 203, 11, 12, 13, 224, 14, 15, 578, 16, 68, 579, 69, 70, 3

School Before & After School Program 431, 573, 312, 309, 71, 316, 318, 319, 570, 325, 73 4 Esperanza Middle School 238, 49, 231, 48, 47, 46, 45, 16, 67, 293 5 Town Creek Elementary School 230, 229, 228, 48, 47, 46, 45, 16, 67, 293 Patuxent Head Start, Patuxent Elementary School, 187, 493, 176, 8, 491, 9, 486, 487, 10, 196, 198, 197, 568, 203, 11, 12, 13, 6 Patuxent Elementary School Before & After 224, 14, 15, 578, 16, 68, 579, 69, 70, 431, 573, 312, 309, 71, 316, 318, 319, School Program, Appeal Elementary School 570, 325, 73 Our Lady Star of the Sea School & After School 199, 200, 558, 559, 203, 11, 12, 13, 224, 14, 15, 578, 16, 68, 579, 69, 70, 431, 7

Care 573, 312, 309, 71, 316, 318, 319, 570, 325, 73 9 Green Holly Elementary School 240, 50, 49, 231, 48, 47, 46, 45, 16, 67, 293 10 Hollywood Elementary School 311, 310, 475, 309, 71, 316, 318, 319, 570, 325, 73 483, 484, 540, 485, 489, 486, 487, 10, 196, 198, 197, 568, 203, 11, 12, 13, 11 Patuxent High School & Mill Creek Middle School 224, 14, 15, 578, 16, 68, 579, 69, 70, 431, 573, 312, 309, 71, 316, 318, 319, 570, 325, 73 175, 5, 6, 7, 8, 491, 9, 486, 487, 10, 196, 198, 197, 568, 203, 11, 12, 13, 224, 12 Southern Middle School 14, 15, 578, 16, 68, 579, 69, 70, 431, 573, 312, 309, 71, 316, 318, 319, 570, 325, 73 13 St. Johns Elementary School 314, 313, 312, 309, 71, 301, 300 14 Grovers Place Day Care & Calvert Beach Run 495, 152, 20, 335, 21, 339, 436, 23, 25, 554, 340, 24 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 819 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Bus Route Number Description Nodes Traversed from Route Start to EPZ Boundary 405, 198, 197, 568, 203, 11, 12, 13, 224, 14, 15, 578, 16, 68, 579, 69, 70, 431, 15 Solomons Day Care Center 573, 312, 309, 71, 316, 318, 319, 570, 325, 73 St Leonard Elementary School, St Leonard 16 Elementary School Before & After School 157, 501, 500, 153, 506, 505, 338, 20, 335, 21, 339, 436, 23, 25, 554, 340, 24 Program, South Port Republic Run Asbury Solomons Island Assisted Living & Nursing 405, 198, 197, 568, 203, 11, 12, 13, 224, 14, 15, 578, 16, 68, 579, 69, 70, 431, 17 Home 573, 312, 309, 71, 316, 318, 319, 570, 325, 73 146, 563, 564, 143, 562, 379, 566, 565, 142, 560, 22, 339, 436, 23, 25, 554, 18 In God's Care Inc. & East Broomes Island Run 340, 24 The Hermitage at St. John's Creek & Solomons 204, 195, 202, 198, 197, 568, 203, 11, 12, 13, 224, 14, 15, 578, 16, 68, 579, 19 Nursing Center 69, 70, 431, 573, 312, 309, 71, 316, 318, 319, 570, 325, 73 169, 4, 544, 3, 336, 159, 17, 158, 18, 384, 19, 505, 338, 20, 335, 21, 339, 436, 20 3 Beas' Assisted Living 23, 25, 554, 340, 24 7, 6, 5, 167, 165, 4, 544, 3, 336, 159, 17, 158, 18, 384, 19, 505, 338, 20, 335, 25 White Sands Run 21, 339, 436, 23, 25, 554, 340, 24 West Broomes Island Road Run & North Port 381, 382, 144, 567, 380, 561, 379, 566, 565, 142, 560, 22, 339, 436, 23, 25, 26 Republic Run 554, 340, 24 Prince Frederick Run, Dares Beach Run, Barstow 27 387, 91, 389, 90, 391, 390, 92, 24 Run Cove Point Run, Lusby West Run, Drum Point Run, 409, 191, 179, 174, 178, 177, 187, 493, 176, 8, 491, 9, 486, 487, 10, 196, 198, 28 Lusby East Run, Solomons Run 197, 568, 203, 11, 12, 13, 224, 14, 15, 578, 16, 67, 293 407, 182, 183, 193, 550, 552, 184, 176, 490, 485, 195, 202, 198, 197, 568, 29 CRE Central Run, CRE South Run. CRE North Run 203, 11, 12, 13, 224, 14, 15, 578, 16, 67, 293 31 Servicing Zone 6 410, 320, 73, 325, 570, 319, 318, 316, 71, 301, 300 51, 53, 52, 533, 244, 242, 50, 49, 231, 48, 47, 46, 45, 16, 68, 579, 69, 70, 431, 32 Servicing Zone 7 573, 312, 309, 71, 301, 300 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 820 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 87. School Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Travel Time Driver Dist. To Average Travel Time Dist. EPZ from EPZ ETE to Mobilization Loading EPZ Bdry Speed to EPZ Bdry ETE Bdry to Bdry to H.S. H.S.

School Time (min) Time (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) H.S. (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

CALVERT COUNTY SCHOOLS Appeal Elementary School 90 15 16.9 7.4 136 4:05 60.3 72 5:15 Dowell Elementary School 90 15 15.0 12.1 74 3:00 62.3 75 4:15 Dowell Elementary School Before &

90 15 15.0 12.1 74 3:00 62.3 75 4:15 After School Program Grover's Place Day Care 90 15 6.8 13.9 29 2:15 9.9 12 2:30 Mill Creek Middle School 90 15 15.9 7.8 122 3:50 60.2 72 5:00 Mutual Elementary School 90 15 6.8 7.4 55 2:40 2.0 2 2:45 Mutual Elementary School Before &

90 15 6.8 7.4 55 2:40 2.0 2 2:45 After School Program Our Lady Star of the Sea School 90 15 13.9 19.2 44 2:30 58.0 70 3:40 Our Lady Star of the Sea School (ASC) 90 15 13.9 19.2 44 2:30 58.0 70 3:40 Patuxent Elementary School Before &

90 15 16.9 7.4 137 4:05 58.1 70 5:15 After School Program Patuxent Elementary School 90 15 16.9 7.4 137 4:05 58.1 70 5:15 Patuxent Head Start 90 15 16.9 7.4 137 4:05 58.1 70 5:15 Patuxent High School 90 15 16.4 7.9 125 3:50 52.3 63 4:55 Solomon's Day Care Center 90 15 14.3 15.1 57 2:45 53.8 65 3:50 Southern Middle School 90 15 12.2 7.5 98 3:25 55.4 66 4:30 St. Leonard Elementary School Before 90 15 8.0 17.1 28 2:15 14.5 17 2:30

& After School Program St. Leonard Elementary School 90 15 8.0 17.1 28 2:15 14.5 17 2:30 St. Paul's Preschool 90 15 17.7 7.9 134 4:00 55.5 67 5:10 ST. MARY'S COUNTY SCHOOLS Esperanza Middle School 90 15 2.6 42.8 4 1:50 6.7 8 2:00 Green Holly Elementary School 90 15 3.3 40.4 5 1:50 15.1 18 2:10 Hollywood Elementary School 90 15 7.3 17.1 26 2:15 5.4 7 2:20 St John's Elementary School 90 15 3.0 32.8 5 1:50 4.6 5 1:55 Town Creek Elementary School 90 15 2.9 43.7 4 1:50 6.7 8 2:00 Maximum for EPZ: 4:05 Maximum: 5:15 Average for EPZ: 2:55 Average: 3:40 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 821 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 88. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Rain Dist. EPZ Travel Time Driver Dist. To Average Travel Time Bdry to from EPZ ETE to Mobilization Loading EPZ Bdry Speed to EPZ Bdry ETE H.S. Bdry to H.S. H.S.

School Time (min) Time (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

CALVERTCOUNTY SCHOOLS Appeal Elementary School 100 20 16.9 7.0 145 4:25 60.3 80 5:45 Dowell Elementary School 100 20 15.0 12.2 74 3:15 62.3 83 4:40 Dowell Elementary School Before & After 100 20 15.0 12.2 74 3:15 62.3 83 4:40 School Program Grover's Place Day Care 100 20 6.8 15.3 27 2:30 9.9 13 2:40 Mill Creek Middle School 100 20 15.9 7.6 126 4:10 60.2 80 5:30 Mutual Elementary School 100 20 6.8 6.4 63 3:05 2.0 3 3:10 Mutual Elementary School Before & After 100 20 6.8 6.4 63 3:05 2.0 3 3:10 School Program Our Lady Star of the Sea School 100 20 13.9 19.1 44 2:45 58.0 77 4:05 Our Lady Star of the Sea School (ASC) 100 20 13.9 19.1 44 2:45 58.0 77 4:05 Patuxent Elementary School Before &

100 20 16.9 7.0 145 4:25 58.1 77 5:45 After School Program Patuxent Elementary School 100 20 16.9 7.0 145 4:25 58.1 78 5:45 Patuxent Head Start 100 20 16.9 7.0 145 4:25 58.1 77 5:45 Patuxent High School 100 20 16.4 7.6 130 4:10 52.3 70 5:20 Solomon's Day Care Center 100 20 14.3 14.7 58 3:00 53.8 72 4:10 Southern Middle School 100 20 12.2 7.0 104 3:45 55.4 74 5:00 St. Leonard Elementary School Before &

100 20 8.0 16.0 30 2:30 14.5 19 2:50 After School Program St. Leonard Elementary School 100 20 8.0 16.0 30 2:30 14.5 19 2:50 St. Paul's Preschool 100 20 17.7 7.4 144 4:25 55.5 74 5:40 ST. MARY'S COUNTY SCHOOLS Esperanza Middle School 100 20 2.6 39.9 4 2:05 6.7 9 2:15 Green Holly Elementary School 100 20 3.3 37.5 5 2:05 15.1 20 2:25 Hollywood Elementary School 100 20 7.3 16.3 27 2:30 5.4 7 2:35 St John's Elementary School 100 20 3.0 24.4 7 2:10 4.6 6 2:15 Town Creek Elementary School 100 20 2.9 40.0 4 2:05 6.7 9 2:15 Maximum for EPZ: 4:25 Maximum: 5:45 Average for EPZ: 3:15 Average: 4:05 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 822 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 89. School Evacuation Time Estimates - Snow Dist. EPZ Travel Time Driver Dist. To Average Travel Time Bdry to from EPZ ETE to Mobilization Loading EPZ Bdry Speed to EPZ Bdry ETE H.S. Bdry to H.S. H.S.

School Time (min) Time (min) (mi) (mph) (min) (hr:min) (mi.) (min) (hr:min)

CALVERTCOUNTY SCHOOLS Appeal Elementary School 120 25 16.9 7.2 141 4:50 60.3 90 6:20 Dowell Elementary School 120 25 15.0 13.9 65 3:30 62.3 94 5:05 Dowell Elementary School Before & After 120 25 15.0 13.9 65 3:30 62.3 93 5:05 School Program Grover's Place Day Care 120 25 6.8 13.3 31 3:00 9.9 15 3:15 Mill Creek Middle School 120 25 15.9 7.8 122 4:30 60.2 90 6:00 Mutual Elementary School 120 25 6.8 6.8 60 3:25 2.0 3 3:30 Mutual Elementary School Before & After 120 25 6.8 6.8 60 3:25 2.0 3 3:30 School Program Our Lady Star of the Sea School 120 25 13.9 24.9 33 3:00 58.0 87 4:25 Our Lady Star of the Sea School (ASC) 120 25 13.9 24.9 33 3:00 58.0 87 4:25 Patuxent Elementary School Before & After 120 25 16.9 7.2 141 4:50 58.1 87 6:15 School Program Patuxent Elementary School 120 25 16.9 7.2 141 4:50 58.1 87 6:15 Patuxent Head Start 120 25 16.9 7.2 141 4:50 58.1 87 6:15 Patuxent High School 120 25 16.4 7.8 126 4:35 52.3 78 5:50 Solomon's Day Care Center 120 25 14.3 18.4 47 3:15 53.8 81 4:35 Southern Middle School 120 25 12.2 7.5 97 4:05 55.4 83 5:25 St. Leonard Elementary School Before &

120 25 8.0 14.0 34 3:00 14.5 22 3:25 After School Program St. Leonard Elementary School 120 25 8.0 14.0 34 3:00 14.5 22 3:25 St. Paul's Preschool 120 25 17.7 7.6 139 4:45 55.5 83 6:10 ST. MARY'S COUNTY SCHOOLS Esperanza Middle School 120 25 2.6 36.3 4 2:30 6.7 10 2:40 Green Holly Elementary School 120 25 3.3 34.2 6 2:35 15.1 23 2:55 Hollywood Elementary School 120 25 7.3 23.8 18 2:45 5.4 8 2:55 St John's Elementary School 120 25 3.0 19.0 9 2:35 4.6 7 2:45 Town Creek Elementary School 120 25 2.9 36.1 5 2:30 6.7 10 2:40 Maximum for EPZ: 4:50 Maximum: 6:20 Average for EPZ: 3:35 Average: 4:30 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 823 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 810. Summary of TransitDependent Bus Routes No. of Length Route # Buses Route Description (mi.)

1 2 Calvert Beach Run 22.4 2 2 White Sands Run 18 3 1 South Port Republic Run 15.9 4 2 East Broomes Island Road Run 33.9 5 1 Cove Point Run 21.5 6 2 CRE Central Run 22.1 7 2 CRE South Run 23.4 8 2 CRE North Run 19.0 9 2 Lusby West Run 22.5 10 1 Drum Point Run 19.2 11 1 Lusby East Run 15.9 12 1 Solomons Run 22.0 13 1 West Broomes Island Road Run 34.4 14 1 Barstow Run 19.5 15 1 North Port Republic Run 23.1 16 1 Prince Frederick Run 7.5 17 1 Dares Beach Run 12.7 18 3 Servicing Zone 6 6.9 19 6 Servicing Zone 7 9.5 TOTAL: 33 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 824 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 811. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Bus Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number Number (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 1 1, 2 90 22.4 21.8 62 30 3:05 6.1 7 5 10 61 30 5:00 2 1, 2 90 18.0 24.5 44 30 2:45 6.1 7 5 10 51 30 4:30 3 1 90 15.9 18.8 51 30 2:55 6.1 7 5 10 45 30 4:35 4 1, 2 90 33.9 17.0 120 30 4:00 6.1 7 5 10 89 30 6:25 5 1 90 21.5 4.7 275 30 6:35 70.9 85 5 10 137 30 11:05 6 1, 2 90 22.1 3.7 361 30 8:05 70.9 85 5 10 138 30 12:35 7 1, 2 90 23.4 3.8 372 30 8:15 70.9 85 5 10 141 30 12:50 8 1, 2 90 19.0 3.4 339 30 7:40 70.9 85 5 10 131 30 12:05 9 1, 2 90 22.5 4.8 282 30 6:45 70.9 85 5 10 139 30 11:15 10 1 90 19.2 4.5 257 30 6:20 70.9 85 5 10 131 30 10:45 11 1 90 12.9 3.9 197 30 5:20 70.9 85 5 10 116 30 9:30 12 1 90 22.0 4.7 280 30 6:40 70.9 85 5 10 138 30 11:10 13 1 90 34.4 17.1 121 30 4:05 6.1 7 5 10 90 30 6:30 14 1 90 19.5 22.1 53 30 2:55 6.1 7 5 10 58 30 4:50 15 1 90 23.1 13.5 102 30 3:45 6.1 7 5 10 63 30 5:45 16 1 90 7.5 22.2 20 30 2:20 6.1 7 5 10 33 30 3:50 17 1 90 12.7 23.8 32 30 2:35 6.1 7 5 10 45 30 4:15 18 1,2,3 120 6.9 50.0 8 30 2:40 4.0 5 5 10 21 30 3:55 1,2,3 120 9.5 28.6 20 30 2:50 4.0 5 5 10 28 30 4:10 19 4,5,6 130 9.5 33.5 17 30 3:00 4.0 5 5 10 29 30 4:20 Maximum ETE: 8:15 Maximum ETE: 12:50 Average ETE: 4:40 Average ETE: 7:30 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 825 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 812. TransitDependent Evacuation Time Estimates Rain OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Bus Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number Number (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 1 1, 2 100 22.4 18.6 72 40 3:35 6.1 8 5 10 65 40 5:45 2 1, 2 100 18.0 22.3 48 40 3:10 6.1 8 5 10 54 40 5:10 3 1 100 15.9 16.5 58 40 3:20 6.1 8 5 10 48 40 5:15 4 1, 2 100 33.9 15.0 136 40 4:40 6.1 8 5 10 94 40 7:20 5 1 100 21.5 4.3 301 40 7:25 70.9 95 5 10 149 40 12:25 6 1, 2 100 22.1 3.3 400 40 9:00 70.9 95 5 10 151 40 14:05 7 1, 2 100 23.4 3.5 406 40 9:10 70.9 95 5 10 154 40 14:15 8 1, 2 100 19.0 3.1 372 40 8:35 70.9 95 5 10 143 40 13:30 9 1, 2 100 22.5 4.4 307 40 7:30 70.9 95 5 10 152 40 12:35 10 1 100 19.2 4.1 280 40 7:00 70.9 95 5 10 143 40 11:55 11 1 100 12.9 3.6 217 40 6:00 70.9 95 5 10 127 40 10:40 12 1 100 22.0 4.3 304 40 7:25 70.9 95 5 10 150 40 12:25 13 1 100 34.4 14.2 145 40 4:45 6.1 8 5 10 95 40 7:25 14 1 100 19.5 18.6 63 40 3:25 6.1 8 5 10 60 40 5:30 15 1 100 23.1 11.2 124 40 4:25 6.1 8 5 10 67 40 6:40 16 1 100 7.5 22.5 20 40 2:40 6.1 8 5 10 31 40 4:15 17 1 100 12.7 20.5 37 40 3:00 6.1 8 5 10 42 40 4:50 18 1,2,3 130 6.9 47.5 9 40 3:00 4.0 5 5 10 23 40 4:25 1,2,3 130 9.5 28.7 20 40 3:10 4.0 5 5 10 30 40 4:45 19 4,5,6 140 9.5 32.3 18 40 3:20 4.0 5 5 10 29 40 4:50 Maximum ETE: 9:10 Maximum ETE: 14:15 Average ETE: 5:15 Average ETE: 8:25 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 826 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 813. Transit Dependent Evacuation Time Estimates Snow OneWave TwoWave Route Travel Route Route Travel Pickup Distance Time to Driver Travel Pickup Route Bus Mobilization Length Speed Time Time ETE to R. C. R. C. Unload Rest Time Time ETE Number Number (min) (miles) (mph) (min) (min) (hr:min) (miles) (min) (min) (min) (min) (min) (hr:min) 1 1, 2 110 22.4 15.6 86 50 4:10 6.1 9 5 10 70 50 6:35 2 1, 2 110 18.0 22.2 49 50 3:30 6.1 9 5 10 58 50 5:45 3 1 110 15.9 13.8 69 50 3:50 6.1 9 5 10 52 50 6:00 4 1, 2 110 33.9 15.8 129 50 4:50 6.1 9 5 10 312 50 11:20 5 1 110 21.5 4.3 303 50 7:45 70.9 106 5 10 169 50 13:30 6 1, 2 110 22.1 3.1 424 50 9:45 70.9 106 5 10 171 50 15:30 7 1, 2 110 23.4 3.3 427 50 9:50 70.9 106 5 10 173 50 15:35 8 1, 2 110 19.0 2.8 400 50 9:20 70.9 106 5 10 160 50 14:55 9 1, 2 110 22.5 4.3 311 50 7:55 70.9 106 5 10 167 50 13:35 10 1 110 19.2 4.2 277 50 7:20 70.9 106 5 10 160 50 12:55 11 1 110 12.9 3.7 209 50 6:10 70.9 106 5 10 141 50 11:25 12 1 110 22.0 4.3 308 50 7:50 70.9 106 5 10 168 50 13:30 13 1 110 34.4 15.5 133 50 4:55 6.1 9 5 10 106 50 8:00 14 1 110 19.5 13.3 88 50 4:10 6.1 9 5 10 63 50 6:30 15 1 110 23.1 12.0 116 50 4:40 6.1 9 5 10 72 50 7:10 16 1 110 7.5 17.8 25 50 3:05 6.1 9 5 10 29 50 4:50 17 1 110 12.7 17.0 45 50 3:25 6.1 9 5 10 43 50 5:25 18 1,2,3 140 6.9 36.5 11 50 3:25 4.0 6 5 10 25 50 5:05 1,2,3 140 9.5 22.3 26 50 3:40 4.0 6 5 10 32 50 5:25 19 4,5,6 150 9.5 29.4 19 50 3:40 4.0 6 5 10 32 50 5:25 Maximum ETE: 9:50 Maximum ETE: 15:35 Average ETE: 5:40 Average ETE: 9:25 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 827 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 814. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Good Weather Loading Travel Rate Time to (min Total EPZ Mobilization per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Ambulatory 1 4 3 Beas' Assisted 90 9 11.7 37 2:20 Living Wheelchair Bound 5 1 Bedridden 90 15 1 15 11.7 31 2:20 In God's Care, Ambulatory 90 1 5 5 12.5 63 2:40 Inc.

Asbury Ambulatory 1 15 Solomons Island 90 45 14.7 44 3:00 5 6 Assisted Living Wheelchair Bound Asbury Ambulatory 1 13 Solomons Island 90 88 14.7 40 3:40 Wheelchair Bound 5 27 Skilled Nursing Home Bedridden 90 15 1 15 14.7 59 2:45 Solomons Ambulatory 1 8 90 83 14.9 59 3:55 Nursing Center Wheelchair Bound 5 70 Inc. Bedridden 90 15 6 30 14.9 79 3:20 The Hermitage Ambulatory 1 24 at St. John's 90 99 14.9 70 4:20 Creek Wheelchair Bound 5 25 Maximum ETE: 4:20 Average ETE: 3:10 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 828 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 815. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Rain Loading Travel Rate Time to (min Total EPZ Mobilization per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Ambulatory 100 1 4 Wheelchair 9 11.7 43 2:35 3 Beas' Assisted Living Bound 100 5 1 15 11.7 36 2:35 Bedridden 100 15 1 Ambulatory &

In God's Care, Inc. Wheelchair 5 12.5 84 3:10 bound 100 1 5 Asbury Solomons Ambulatory 100 1 15 Island Assisted Wheelchair 15 14.7 63 3:00 Living bound 100 5 6 Ambulatory 100 1 13 Asbury Solomons Wheelchair 83 14.7 38 3:45 Island Skilled Bound 100 5 27 Nursing Home 2:15 Bedridden 100 15 1 15 14.7 20 Ambulatory 100 1 8 Wheelchair 8 14.9 90 3:20 Solomons Nursing Center Inc. bound 100 5 70 30 14.9 79 3:30 Bedridden 100 15 6 Ambulatory 100 1 24 The Hermitage at 4:25 Wheelchair 99 14.9 65 St. John's Creek bound 100 5 25 Maximum ETE: 4:25 Average ETE: 3:10 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 829 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 816. Medical Facility Evacuation Time Estimates Snow Loading Travel Rate Time to (min Total EPZ Mobilization per Loading Dist. To EPZ Boundary ETE Medical Facility Patient (min) person) People Time (min) Bdry (mi) (min) (hr:min)

Ambulatory 110 1 4 Wheelchair 9 11.7 54 2:55 3 Beas' Assisted Living Bound 110 5 1 15 11.7 52 3:00 Bedridden 110 15 1 Ambulatory &

In God's Care, Inc. Wheelchair 5 12.5 77 3:15 bound 110 1 5 Asbury Solomons Ambulatory 110 1 15 Island Assisted Wheelchair 15 14.7 53 3:00 Living bound 110 5 6 Ambulatory 110 1 13 Asbury Solomons Wheelchair 83 14.7 70 4:25 Island Skilled Bound 110 5 27 Nursing Home 3:25 Bedridden 110 15 1 15 14.7 80 Ambulatory 110 1 8 Wheelchair 8 14.9 82 3:20 Solomons Nursing Center Inc. bound 110 5 70 30 14.9 78 3:40 Bedridden 110 15 6 Ambulatory 110 1 24 The Hermitage at 4:40 Wheelchair 99 14.9 70 St. John's Creek bound 110 5 25 Maximum ETE: 4:40 Average ETE: 3:35 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 830 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 817. Homebound Special Needs Population Evacuation Time Estimates Total Travel Mobiliza Loading Loading Time to People tion Time at Travel to Time at EPZ Requiring Vehicles Weather Time 1st Stop Subsequent Subsequent Boundary ETE Vehicle Type Vehicle deployed Stops Conditions (min) (min) Stops (min) Stop (min) (min) (hr:min)

Wheelchair Good 90 9 17 2:10 Accessible 22 11 2 Rain 100 5 10 5 20 2:20 Vehicle Snow 110 11 19 2:30 Good 90 10 17 2:30 Ambulances 2 1 2 Rain 100 15 11 15 20 2:45 Snow 110 13 20 2:55 Maximum ETE: 2:55 Average ETE: 2:35 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 831 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

9 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGY This section discusses the suggested traffic control and management strategy that is designed to expedite the movement of evacuating traffic. The resources required to implement this strategy include:

• Personnel with the capabilities of performing the planned control functions of traffic guides (preferably, not necessarily, law enforcement officers).

• Traffic Control Devices to assist these personnel in the performance of their tasks. These devices should comply with the guidance of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) of the U.S.D.O.T. All state and most county transportation agencies have access to the MUTCD, which is available online: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov which provides access to the official PDF version.

• A plan that defines all locations, provides necessary details and is documented in a format that is readily understood by those assigned to perform traffic control.

The functions to be performed in the field are:

1. Facilitate evacuating traffic movements that safely expedite travel out of the EPZ.

2. Discourage traffic movements that move evacuating vehicles in a direction which takes them significantly closer to the power plant, or which interferes with the efficient flow of other evacuees.

Terms "facilitate" and "discourage" are employed rather than "enforce" and "prohibit" to indicate the need for flexibility in performing the traffic control function. There are always legitimate reasons for a driver to prefer a direction other than that indicated. For example:

• A driver may be traveling home from work or from another location, to join other family members prior to evacuating.

• An evacuating driver may be travelling to pick up a relative, or other evacuees.

• The driver may be an emergency worker en route to perform an important activity.

The implementation of a plan must also be flexible enough for the application of sound judgment by the traffic guide.

The traffic management plan is the outcome of the following process:

1. The existing TCPs and ACPs identified by the offsite agencies in their existing emergency plans serve as the basis of the traffic management plan, as per NUREG/CR7002. As stated in these plans, the Sheriffs Office is the key agency for Access Control. The Maryland State Police Barrack and County Department of Public Works will provide personnel to man predesignated access and traffic control points. Road barricades, flashing signals, and traffic cones will be supplied by the State Highway Administration as needed.

2. The existing TCPs and ACPs and how they were applied in this study are discussed in Appendix G.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 91 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

3. Computer analysis of the evacuation traffic flow environment (see Figures 73 through 78). As discussed in Section 7.3, congestion within the EPZ is clear by 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> and 35 minutes after the ATE. No additional TCPs or ACPs are identified as a result of this study; however a modification to the TCP at the intersection of MD 235 and MD 2/4 is suggested. It is recommended that the control tactics identified in the schematic in Appendix G be reviewed by the county emergency planners, and local and state police.

The use of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) technologies (if available) can reduce manpower and equipment needs, while still facilitating the evacuation process. Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) can be placed within the EPZ to provide information to travelers regarding traffic conditions, route selection, and reception center information. DMS can also be placed outside of the EPZ to warn motorists to avoid using routes that may conflict with the flow of evacuees away from the power plant. Highway Advisory Radio (HAR) can be used to broadcast information to evacuees en route through their vehicle stereo systems. Automated Traveler Information Systems (ATIS) can also be used to provide evacuees with information.

Internet websites can provide traffic and evacuation route information before the evacuee begins their trip, while on board navigation systems (GPS units), cell phones, and pagers can be used to provide information en route. These are only several examples of how ITS technologies can benefit the evacuation process. Consideration should be given that ITS technologies be used to facilitate the evacuation process, and any additional signage placed should consider evacuation needs.

The ETE analysis treated all controlled intersections that are existing TCP locations in the offsite agency plans as being controlled by actuated signals.

Chapters 2N and 5G, and Part 6 of the 2009 MUTCD are particularly relevant and should be reviewed during emergency response training.

All transit vehicles and other responders entering the EPZ to support the evacuation are assumed to be unhindered by personnel manning ACPs and TCPs.

Study Assumption 5 in Section 2.3 discusses TCP staffing schedules and operations.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 92 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

10 EVACUATION ROUTES Evacuation routes are comprised of two distinct components:

• Routing from a zone being evacuated to the boundary of the Evacuation Region and thence out of the EPZ.

• Routing of transitdependent evacuees from the EPZ boundary to reception centers.

Evacuees will select routes within the EPZ in such a way as to minimize their exposure to risk.

This expectation is met by the DYNEV II model routing traffic away from the location of the plant, to the extent practicable. The DTRAD model satisfies this behavior by routing traffic so as to balance traffic demand relative to the available highway capacity to the extent possible.

See Appendices B through D for further discussion.

The routing of transitdependent evacuees from the EPZ boundary to reception centers or host facilities is designed to minimize the amount of travel outside the EPZ, from the points where these routes cross the EPZ boundary.

Figure 101 presents a map showing the general population reception centers and host schools for evacuees. The major evacuation routes for the EPZ are presented in Figure 102.

It is assumed that all school evacuees will be taken to the appropriate host school and subsequently picked up by parents or guardians. Transitdependent evacuees are transported to the nearest reception center for each county. This study does not consider the transport of evacuees from reception centers to masscare centers, if the counties do make the decision to relocate evacuees.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 101 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 101. General Population and Host Schools Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 102 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure 102. Major Evacuation Routes Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 103 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

11 SURVEILLANCE OF EVACUATION OPERATIONS There is a need for surveillance of traffic operations during the evacuation. There is also a need to clear any blockage of roadways arising from accidents or vehicle disablement. Surveillance can take several forms.

1. Traffic control personnel, located at Traffic Control and Access Control points, provide fixedpoint surveillance.

2. Ground patrols may be undertaken along welldefined paths to ensure coverage of those highways that serve as major evacuation routes.

3. Aerial surveillance of evacuation operations may also be conducted using helicopter or fixedwing aircraft, if available.

4. Cellular phone calls (if cellular coverage exists) from motorists may also provide direct field reports of road blockages.

These concurrent surveillance procedures are designed to provide coverage of the entire EPZ as well as the area around its periphery. It is the responsibility of the Counties to support an emergency response system that can receive messages from the field and be in a position to respond to any reported problems in a timely manner. This coverage should quickly identify, and expedite the response to any blockage caused by a disabled vehicle.

Tow Vehicles In a lowspeed traffic environment, any vehicle disablement is likely to arise due to a lowspeed collision, mechanical failure or the exhaustion of its fuel supply. In any case, the disabled vehicle can be pushed onto the shoulder, thereby restoring traffic flow. Past experience in other emergencies indicates that evacuees who are leaving an area often perform activities such as pushing a disabled vehicle to the side of the road without prompting. According to their Radiological Emergency Plans the Counties plan to preposition personnel, equipment and materials along evacuation routes and at traditional congestion areas, which would help to mitigate the impact of any vehicle disablement.

This equipment should include tow trucks with a supply of gasoline deployed at locations selected so that:

They permit access to key, heavily loaded, evacuation routes.

Responding tow trucks would most likely travel counterflow relative to evacuating traffic.

Consideration should also be given that the state and local emergency management agencies encourage gas stations to remain open during the evacuation.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 111 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

12 CONFIRMATION TIME It is necessary to confirm that the evacuation process is effective in the sense that the public is complying with the Advisory to Evacuate. The EPZ county radiological emergency plans do not discuss a procedure for confirming evacuation. Should procedures not already exist, the following alternative or complementary approach is suggested.

The suggested procedure employs a stratified random sample and a telephone survey. The size of the sample is dependent on the expected number of households that do not comply with the Advisory to Evacuate. It is reasonable to assume for the purpose of estimating sample size that at least 80 percent of the population within the EPZ will comply with the Advisory to Evacuate.

On this basis, an analysis could be undertaken (see Table 121) to yield an estimated sample size of approximately 300.

The confirmation process should start at about 11/2 hours after the Advisory to Evacuate, which is when approximately 90 percent of evacuees have completed their mobilization activities (see Table 59). At this time, virtually all evacuees will have departed on their respective trips and the local telephone system will be largely free of traffic.

As indicated in Table 121, approximately 71/2 person hours are needed to complete the telephone survey. If six people are assigned to this task, each dialing a different set of telephone exchanges (e.g., each person can be assigned a different set of zones), then the confirmation process will extend over a timeframe of about 75 minutes. Thus, the confirmation should be completed before the evacuated area is cleared. Of course, fewer people would be needed for this survey if the Evacuation Region were only a portion of the EPZ. Use of modern automated computer controlled dialing equipment or other technologies (e.g., reverse 911 or equivalent if available) can significantly reduce the manpower requirements and the time required to undertake this type of confirmation survey.

If this method is indeed used by the offsite agencies, consideration should be given to maintain a list of telephone numbers within the EPZ in the EOC at all times. Such a list could be purchased from vendors and could be periodically updated. As indicated above, the confirmation process should not begin until 11/2 hours after the Advisory to Evacuate, to ensure that households have had enough time to mobilize. This 11/2hour timeframe will enable telephone operators to arrive at their workplace, obtain a call list and prepare to make the necessary phone calls.

Should the number of telephone responses (i.e., people still at home) exceed 20 percent, then the telephone survey should be repeated after an hour's interval until the confirmation process is completed.

Other techniques could also be considered. After traffic volumes decline, the personnel manning TCPs can be redeployed to travel through residential areas to observe and to confirm evacuation activities.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant 121 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table 121. Estimated Number of Telephone Calls Required for Confirmation of Evacuation Problem Definition Estimate number of phone calls, n, needed to ascertain the proportion, F of households that have not evacuated.

Reference:

Burstein, H., Attribute Sampling, McGraw Hill, 1971 Given:

No. of households plus other facilities, N, within the EPZ (est.) = 18,900 Est. proportion, F, of households that will not evacuate = 0.20 Allowable error margin, e: 0.05 Confidence level, : 0.95 (implies A = 1.96)

Applying Table 10 of cited reference, 0.25; 1 0.75 308 Finite population correction:

303 1

Thus, some 300 telephone calls will confirm that approximately 20 percent of the population has not evacuated. If only 10 percent of the population does not comply with the Advisory to Evacuate, then the required sample size, nF = 213.

Est. Person Hours to complete 300 telephone calls Assume:

Time to dial using touch tone (random selection of listed numbers): 30 seconds Time for 6 rings (no answer): 36 seconds Time for 4 rings plus short conversation: 60 sec.

Interval between calls: 20 sec.

Person Hours:

300 30 0.8 36 0.2 60 20 7.6 3600 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant 122 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

APPENDIX A Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms

A. GLOSSARY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TERMS Table A1. Glossary of Traffic Engineering Terms Term Definition Analysis Network A graphical representation of the geometric topology of a physical roadway system, which is comprised of directional links and nodes.

Link A network link represents a specific, onedirectional section of roadway. A link has both physical (length, number of lanes, topology, etc.) and operational (turn movement percentages, service rate, freeflow speed) characteristics.

Measures of Effectiveness Statistics describing traffic operations on a roadway network.

Node A network node generally represents an intersection of network links. A node has control characteristics, i.e., the allocation of service time to each approach link.

Origin A location attached to a network link, within the EPZ or Shadow Region, where trips are generated at a specified rate in vehicles per hour (vph). These trips enter the roadway system to travel to their respective destinations.

Prevailing Roadway and Relates to the physical features of the roadway, the nature (e.g.,

Traffic Conditions composition) of traffic on the roadway and the ambient conditions (weather, visibility, pavement conditions, etc.).

Service Rate Maximum rate at which vehicles, executing a specific turn maneuver, can be discharged from a section of roadway at the prevailing conditions, expressed in vehicles per second (vps) or vehicles per hour (vph).

Service Volume Maximum number of vehicles which can pass over a section of roadway in one direction during a specified time period with operating conditions at a specified Level of Service (The Service Volume at the upper bound of Level of Service, E, equals Capacity).

Service Volume is usually expressed as vehicles per hour (vph).

Signal Cycle Length The total elapsed time to display all signal indications, in sequence.

The cycle length is expressed in seconds.

Signal Interval A single combination of signal indications. The interval duration is expressed in seconds. A signal phase is comprised of a sequence of signal intervals, usually green, yellow, red.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant A1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Term Definition Signal Phase A set of signal indications (and intervals) which services a particular combination of traffic movements on selected approaches to the intersection. The phase duration is expressed in seconds.

Traffic (Trip) Assignment A process of assigning traffic to paths of travel in such a way as to satisfy all trip objectives (i.e., the desire of each vehicle to travel from a specified origin in the network to a specified destination) and to optimize some stated objective or combination of objectives. In general, the objective is stated in terms of minimizing a generalized "cost". For example, "cost" may be expressed in terms of travel time.

Traffic Density The number of vehicles that occupy one lane of a roadway section of specified length at a point in time, expressed as vehicles per mile (vpm).

Traffic (Trip) Distribution A process for determining the destinations of all traffic generated at the origins. The result often takes the form of a Trip Table, which is a matrix of origindestination traffic volumes.

Traffic Simulation A computer model designed to replicate the realworld operation of vehicles on a roadway network, so as to provide statistics describing traffic performance. These statistics are called Measures of Effectiveness.

Traffic Volume The number of vehicles that pass over a section of roadway in one direction, expressed in vehicles per hour (vph). Where applicable, traffic volume may be stratified by turn movement.

Travel Mode Distinguishes between private auto, bus, rail, pedestrian and air travel modes.

Trip Table or Origin A rectangular matrix or table, whose entries contain the number Destination Matrix of trips generated at each specified origin, during a specified time period, that are attracted to (and travel toward) each of its specified destinations. These values are expressed in vehicles per hour (vph) or in vehicles.

Turning Capacity The capacity associated with that component of the traffic stream which executes a specified turn maneuver from an approach at an intersection.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant A2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

APPENDIX B DTRAD: Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution Model

B. DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT AND DISTRIBUTION MODEL This section describes the integrated dynamic trip assignment and distribution model named DTRAD (Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Distribution) that is expressly designed for use in analyzing evacuation scenarios. DTRAD employs logitbased pathchoice principles and is one of the models of the DYNEVII System. The DTRAD module implements pathbased Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA) so that time dependent OriginDestination (OD) trips are assigned to routes over the network based on prevailing traffic conditions.

To apply the DYNEV II System, the analyst must specify the highway network, link capacity information, the timevarying volume of traffic generated at all origin centroids and, optionally, a set of accessible candidate destination nodes on the periphery of the EPZ for selected origins.

DTRAD calculates the optimal dynamic trip distribution (i.e., trip destinations) and the optimal dynamic trip assignment (i.e., trip routing) of the traffic generated at each origin node traveling to its set of candidate destination nodes, so as to minimize evacuee travel cost.

Overview of Integrated Distribution and Assignment Model The underlying premise is that the selection of destinations and routes is intrinsically coupled in an evacuation scenario. That is, people in vehicles seek to travel out of an area of potential risk as rapidly as possible by selecting the best routes. The model is designed to identify these best routes in a manner that realistically distributes vehicles from origins to destinations and routes them over the highway network, in a consistent and optimal manner, reflecting evacuee behavior.

For each origin, a set of candidate destination nodes is selected by the software logic and by the analyst to reflect the desire by evacuees to travel away from the power plant and to access major highways. The specific destination nodes within this set that are selected by travelers and the selection of the connecting paths of travel, are both determined by DTRAD. This determination is made by a logitbased path choice model in DTRAD, so as to minimize the trip cost, as discussed later.

The traffic loading on the network and the consequent operational traffic environment of the network (density, speed, throughput on each link) vary over time as the evacuation takes place.

The DTRAD model, which is interfaced with the DYNEV simulation model, executes a succession of sessions wherein it computes the optimal routing and selection of destination nodes for the conditions that exist at that time.

Interfacing the DYNEV Simulation Model with DTRAD The DYNEV II system reflects NRC guidance that evacuees will seek to travel in a general direction away from the location of the hazardous event. An algorithm was developed to support the DTRAD model in dynamically varying the Trip Table (OD matrix) over time from one DTRAD session to the next. Another algorithm executes a mapping from the specified geometric network (linknode analysis network) that represents the physical highway system, to a path network that represents the vehicle [turn] movements. DTRAD computations are performed on the path network: DYNEV simulation model, on the geometric network.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant B1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

DTRAD Description DTRAD is the DTA module for the DYNEV II System.

When the road network under study is large, multiple routing options are usually available between trip origins and destinations. The problem of loading traffic demands and propagating them over the network links is called Network Loading and is addressed by DYNEVII using macroscopic traffic simulation modeling. Traffic assignment deals with computing the distribution of the traffic over the road network for given OD demands and is a model of the route choice of the drivers. Travel demand changes significantly over time, and the road network may have time dependent characteristics, e.g., timevarying signal timing or reduced road capacity because of lane closure, or traffic congestion. To consider these time dependencies, DTA procedures are required.

The DTRAD DTA module represents the dynamic route choice behavior of drivers, using the specification of dynamic origindestination matrices as flow input. Drivers choose their routes through the network based on the travel cost they experience (as determined by the simulation model). This allows traffic to be distributed over the network according to the timedependent conditions. The modeling principles of DTRAD include:

It is assumed that drivers not only select the best route (i.e., lowest cost path) but some also select less attractive routes. The algorithm implemented by DTRAD archives several efficient routes for each OD pair from which the drivers choose.

The choice of one route out of a set of possible routes is an outcome of discrete choice modeling. Given a set of routes and their generalized costs, the percentages of drivers that choose each route is computed. The most prevalent model for discrete choice modeling is the logit model. DTRAD uses a variant of PathSizeLogit model (PSL). PSL overcomes the drawback of the traditional multinomial logit model by incorporating an additional deterministic path size correction term to address path overlapping in the random utility expression.

DTRAD executes the TA algorithm on an abstract network representation called "the path network" which is built from the actual physical linknode analysis network. This execution continues until a stable situation is reached: the volumes and travel times on the edges of the path network do not change significantly from one iteration to the next. The criteria for this convergence are defined by the user.

Travel cost plays a crucial role in route choice. In DTRAD, path cost is a linear summation of the generalized cost of each link that comprises the path. The generalized cost for a link, a, is expressed as ca ta la sa ,

where ca is the generalized cost for link a, and , , and are cost coefficients for link travel time, distance, and supplemental cost, respectively. Distance and supplemental costs are defined as invariant properties of the network model, while travel time is a dynamic property dictated by prevailing traffic conditions. The DYNEV simulation model Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant B2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

computes travel times on all edges in the network and DTRAD uses that information to constantly update the costs of paths. The route choice decision model in the next simulation iteration uses these updated values to adjust the route choice behavior. This way, traffic demands are dynamically reassigned based on time dependent conditions.

The interaction between the DTRAD traffic assignment and DYNEV II simulation models is depicted in Figure B1. Each round of interaction is called a Traffic Assignment Session (TA session). A TA session is composed of multiple iterations, marked as loop B in the figure.

The supplemental cost is based on the survival distribution (a variation of the exponential distribution).The Inverse Survival Function is a cost term in DTRAD to represent the potential risk of travel toward the plant:

sa = ln (p), 0 p l ; 0 p=

dn = Distance of node, n, from the plant d0 =Distance from the plant where there is zero risk

= Scaling factor The value of do = 15 miles, the outer distance of the shadow region. Note that the supplemental cost, sa, of link, a, is (high, low), if its downstream node, n, is (near, far from) the power plant.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant B3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Network Equilibrium In 1952, John Wardrop wrote:

Under equilibrium conditions traffic arranges itself in congested networks in such a way that no individual tripmaker can reduce his path costs by switching routes.

The above statement describes the User Equilibrium definition, also called the Selfish Driver Equilibrium. It is a hypothesis that represents a [hopeful] condition that evolves over time as drivers search out alternative routes to identify those routes that minimize their respective costs. It has been found that this equilibrium objective to minimize costs is largely realized by most drivers who routinely take the same trip over the same network at the same time (i.e.,

commuters). Effectively, such drivers learn which routes are best for them over time. Thus, the traffic environment settles down to a nearequilibrium state.

Clearly, since an emergency evacuation is a sudden, unique event, it does not constitute a long term learning experience which can achieve an equilibrium state. Consequently, DTRAD was not designed as an equilibrium solution, but to represent drivers in a new and unfamiliar situation, who respond in a flexible manner to realtime information (either broadcast or observed) in such a way as to minimize their respective costs of travel.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant B4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Start of next DTRAD Session A

Set T0 Clock time.

Archive System State at T0 Define latest Link Turn Percentages Execute Simulation Model from B time, T0 to T1 (burn time)

Provide DTRAD with link MOE at time, T1 Execute DTRAD iteration; Get new Turn Percentages Retrieve System State at T0 ;

Apply new Link Turn Percents DTRAD iteration converges?

No Yes Next iteration Simulate from T0 to T2 (DTA session duration)

Set Clock to T2 B A Figure B1. Flow Diagram of SimulationDTRAD Interface Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant B5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

APPENDIX C DYNEV Traffic Simulation Model

C. DYNEV TRAFFIC SIMULATION MODEL The DYNEV traffic simulation model is a macroscopic model that describes the operations of traffic flow in terms of aggregate variables: vehicles, flow rate, mean speed, volume, density, queue length, on each link, for each turn movement, during each Time Interval (simulation time step). The model generates trips from sources and from Entry Links and introduces them onto the analysis network at rates specified by the analyst based on the mobilization time distributions. The model simulates the movements of all vehicles on all network links over time until the network is empty. At intervals, the model outputs Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) such as those listed in Table C1.

Model Features Include:

Explicit consideration is taken of the variation in density over the time step; an iterative procedure is employed to calculate an average density over the simulation time step for the purpose of computing a mean speed for moving vehicles.

Multiple turn movements can be serviced on one link; a separate algorithm is used to estimate the number of (fractional) lanes assigned to the vehicles performing each turn movement, based, in part, on the turn percentages provided by the DTRAD model.

At any point in time, traffic flow on a link is subdivided into two classifications: queued and moving vehicles. The number of vehicles in each classification is computed. Vehicle spillback, stratified by turn movement for each network link, is explicitly considered and quantified. The propagation of stopping waves from link to link is computed within each time step of the simulation. There is no vertical stacking of queues on a link.

Any link can accommodate source flow from zones via side streets and parking facilities that are not explicitly represented. This flow represents the evacuating trips that are generated at the source.

The relation between the number of vehicles occupying the link and its storage capacity is monitored every time step for every link and for every turn movement. If the available storage capacity on a link is exceeded by the demand for service, then the simulator applies a metering rate to the entering traffic from both the upstream feeders and source node to ensure that the available storage capacity is not exceeded.

A path network that represents the specified traffic movements from each network link is constructed by the model; this path network is utilized by the DTRAD model.

A twoway interface with DTRAD: (1) provides link travel times; (2) receives data that translates into link turn percentages.

Provides MOE to animation software, EVAN Calculates ETE statistics Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

All traffic simulation models are dataintensive. Table C2 outlines the necessary input data elements.

To provide an efficient framework for defining these specifications, the physical highway environment is represented as a network. The unidirectional links of the network represent roadway sections: rural, multilane, urban streets or freeways. The nodes of the network generally represent intersections or points along a section where a geometric property changes (e.g. a lane drop, change in grade or free flow speed).

Figure C1 is an example of a small network representation. The freeway is defined by the sequence of links, (20,21), (21,22), and (22,23). Links (8001, 19) and (3, 8011) are Entry and Exit links, respectively. An arterial extends from node 3 to node 19 and is partially subsumed within a grid network. Note that links (21,22) and (17,19) are gradeseparated.

Table C1. Selected Measures of Effectiveness Output by DYNEV II Measure Units Applies To Vehicles Discharged Vehicles Link, Network, Exit Link Speed Miles/Hours (mph) Link, Network Density Vehicles/Mile/Lane Link Level of Service LOS Link Content Vehicles Network Travel Time Vehiclehours Network Evacuated Vehicles Vehicles Network, Exit Link Trip Travel Time Vehicleminutes/trip Network Capacity Utilization Percent Exit Link Attraction Percent of total evacuating vehicles Exit Link Max Queue Vehicles Node, Approach Time of Max Queue Hours:minutes Node, Approach Length (mi); Mean Speed (mph); Travel Route Statistics Route Time (min)

Mean Travel Time Minutes Evacuation Trips; Network Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table C2. Input Requirements for the DYNEV II Model HIGHWAY NETWORK Links defined by upstream and downstream node numbers Link lengths Number of lanes (up to 9) and channelization Turn bays (1 to 3 lanes)

Destination (exit) nodes Network topology defined in terms of downstream nodes for each receiving link Node Coordinates (X,Y)

Nuclear Power Plant Coordinates (X,Y)

GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES On all entry links and source nodes (origins), by Time Period TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIFICATIONS Traffic signals: linkspecific, turn movement specific Signal control treated as fixed time or actuated Location of traffic control points (these are represented as actuated signals)

Stop and Yield signs Rightturnonred (RTOR)

Route diversion specifications Turn restrictions Lane control (e.g. lane closure, movementspecific)

DRIVERS AND OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS Drivers (vehiclespecific) response mechanisms: freeflow speed, discharge headway Bus route designation.

DYNAMIC TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT Candidate destination nodes for each origin (optional)

Duration of DTA sessions Duration of simulation burn time Desired number of destination nodes per origin INCIDENTS Identify and Schedule of closed lanes Identify and Schedule of closed links Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

8011 8009 2 3 8104 8107 6 5 8008 8010 8 9 10 8007 8012 12 11 8006 8005 13 14 8014 15 25 8004 16 24 8024 17 8003 23 22 21 20 8002 Entry, Exit Nodes are 19 numbered 8xxx 8001 Figure C1. Representative Analysis Network Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

C.1 Methodology C.1.1 The Fundamental Diagram It is necessary to define the fundamental diagram describing flowdensity and speeddensity relationships. Rather than settling for a triangular representation, a more realistic representation that includes a capacity drop, (IR)Qmax, at the critical density when flow conditions enter the forced flow regime, is developed and calibrated for each link. This representation, shown in Figure C2, asserts a constant free speed up to a density, k , and then a linear reduction in speed in the range, k k k 45 vpm, the density at capacity. In the flowdensity plane, a quadratic relationship is prescribed in the range, k k 95 vpm which roughly represents the stopandgo condition of severe congestion. The value of flow rate, Q , corresponding to k , is approximated at 0.7 RQ . A linear relationship between k and k completes the diagram shown in Figure C2. Table C3 is a glossary of terms.

The fundamental diagram is applied to moving traffic on every link. The specified calibration values for each link are: (1) Free speed, v ; (2) Capacity, Q  ; (3) Critical density, k 45 vpm ; (4) Capacity Drop Factor, R = 0.9 ; (5) Jam density, k . Then, v , k k

. Setting k k k , then Q RQ k for 0 k k 50 . It can be shown that Q 0.98 0.0056 k RQ for k k k , where k 50 and k 175.

C.1.2 The Simulation Model The simulation model solves a sequence of unit problems. Each unit problem computes the movement of traffic on a link, for each specified turn movement, over a specified time interval (TI) which serves as the simulation time step for all links. Figure C3 is a representation of the unit problem in the timedistance plane. Table C3 is a glossary of terms that are referenced in the following description of the unit problem procedure.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Volume, vph Capacity Drop Qmax R Qmax Qs Density, vpm Flow Regimes Speed, mph Free Forced vf R vc Density, vpm kf kc kj ks Figure C2. Fundamental Diagrams Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Distance OQ OM OE Down Qb vQ Qe v

v L

Mb Me Up t1 t2 Time E1 E2 TI Figure C3. A UNIT Problem Configuration with t1 > 0 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table C3. Glossary The maximum number of vehicles, of a particular movement, that can discharge Cap from a link within a time interval.

The number of vehicles, of a particular movement, that enter the link over the E

time interval. The portion, ETI, can reach the stopbar within the TI.

The green time: cycle time ratio that services the vehicles of a particular turn G/C movement on a link.

h The mean queue discharge headway, seconds.

k Density in vehicles per lane per mile.

The average density of moving vehicles of a particular movement over a TI, on a k

link.

L The length of the link in feet.

The queue length in feet of a particular movement, at the [beginning, end] of a L ,L time interval.

The number of lanes, expressed as a floating point number, allocated to service a LN particular movement on a link.

L The mean effective length of a queued vehicle including the vehicle spacing, feet.

M Metering factor (Multiplier): 1.

The number of moving vehicles on the link, of a particular movement, that are M ,M moving at the [beginning, end] of the time interval. These vehicles are assumed to be of equal spacing, over the length of link upstream of the queue.

The total number of vehicles of a particular movement that are discharged from a O

link over a time interval.

The components of the vehicles of a particular movement that are discharged from a link within a time interval: vehicles that were Queued at the beginning of O ,O ,O the TI; vehicles that were Moving within the link at the beginning of the TI; vehicles that Entered the link during the TI.

The percentage, expressed as a fraction, of the total flow on the link that P

executes a particular turn movement, x.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

The number of queued vehicles on the link, of a particular turn movement, at the Q ,Q

[beginning, end] of the time interval.

The maximum flow rate that can be serviced by a link for a particular movement Q in the absence of a control device. It is specified by the analyst as an estimate of link capacity, based upon a field survey, with reference to the HCM.

R The factor that is applied to the capacity of a link to represent the capacity drop when the flow condition moves into the forced flow regime. The lower capacity at that point is equal to RQ .

RCap The remaining capacity available to service vehicles of a particular movement after that queue has been completely serviced, within a time interval, expressed as vehicles.

S Service rate for movement x, vehicles per hour (vph).

t Vehicles of a particular turn movement that enter a link over the first t seconds of a time interval, can reach the stopbar (in the absence of a queue down stream) within the same time interval.

TI The time interval, in seconds, which is used as the simulation time step.

v The mean speed of travel, in feet per second (fps) or miles per hour (mph), of moving vehicles on the link.

v The mean speed of the last vehicle in a queue that discharges from the link within the TI. This speed differs from the mean speed of moving vehicles, v.

W The width of the intersection in feet. This is the difference between the link length which extends from stopbar to stopbar and the block length.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

The formulation and the associated logic presented below are designed to solve the unit problem for each sweep over the network (discussed below), for each turn movement serviced on each link that comprises the evacuation network, and for each TI over the duration of the evacuation.

Given Q , M , L , TI , E , LN , G C , h , L , R , L , E , M Compute O , Q , M Define O O O O ; E E E

1. For the first sweep, s = 1, of this TI, get initial estimates of mean density, k , the R - factor, R and entering traffic, E , using the values computed for the final sweep of the prior TI.

For each subsequent sweep, s 1 , calculate E P O S where P , O are the relevant turn percentages from feeder link, i , and its total outflow (possibly metered) over this TI; S is the total source flow (possibly metered) during the current TI.

Set iteration counter, n = 0, k k , and E E .

2. Calculate v k such that k 130 using the analytical representations of the fundamental diagram.

Q TI G Calculate Cap 3600 C LN , in vehicles, this value may be reduced due to metering Set R 1.0 if G C 1 or if k k ; Set R 0.9 only if G C 1 and k k L

Calculate queue length, L Q LN

3. Calculate t TI . If t 0 , set t E O 0 ; Else, E E .

4. Then E E E ; t TI t

5. If Q Cap , then O Cap , O O 0 If t 0 , then Q Q M E Cap Else Q Q Cap End if Calculate Q and M using Algorithm A below

6. Else Q Cap O Q , RCap Cap O

7. If M RCap , then Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

t Cap

8. If t 0, O M ,O min RCap M , 0 TI Q E O If Q 0 , then Calculate Q , M with Algorithm A Else Q 0, M E End if Else t 0 O M and O 0 M M O E; Q 0 End if

9. Else M O 0 If t 0 , then O RCap , Q M O E Calculate Q and M using Algorithm A

10. Else t 0 M M If M ,

O RCap Q M O Apply Algorithm A to calculate Q and M Else O M M M O E and Q 0 End if End if End if End if

11. Calculate a new estimate of average density, k k 2k k ,

where k = density at the beginning of the TI k = density at the end of the TI k = density at the midpoint of the TI All values of density apply only to the moving vehicles.

If k k and n N where N max number of iterations, and is a convergence criterion, then Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

12. set n n 1 , and return to step 2 to perform iteration, n, using k k .

End if Computation of unit problem is now complete. Check for excessive inflow causing spillback.

13. If Q M , then The number of excess vehicles that cause spillback is: SB Q M ,

where W is the width of the upstream intersection. To prevent spillback, meter the outflow from the feeder approaches and from the source flow, S, during this TI by the amount, SB. That is, set SB M 1 0 , where M is the metering factor over all movements .

E S This metering factor is assigned appropriately to all feeder links and to the source flow, to be applied during the next network sweep, discussed later.

Algorithm A This analysis addresses the flow environment over a TI during which moving vehicles can join a standing or discharging queue. For the case Qb v Q shown, Q Cap, with t 0 and a queue of Qe Qe length, Q , formed by that portion of M and E that reaches the stopbar within the TI, but could v not discharge due to inadequate capacity. That is, Mb Q M E . This queue length, v Q Q M E Cap can be extended to Q L3 by traffic entering the approach during the current TI, traveling at speed, v, and reaching the rear of the t1 t3 queue within the TI. A portion of the entering TI vehicles, E E , will likely join the queue. This analysis calculates t , Q and M for the input values of L, TI, v, E, t, L , LN, Q .

When t 0 and Q Cap:

L L Define: L Q . From the sketch, L v TI t t L Q E .

LN LN Substituting E E yields: vt E L v TI t L . Recognizing that the first two terms on the right hand side cancel, solve for t to obtain:

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

L t such that 0 t TI t E L v

TI LN If the denominator, v 0, set t TI t .

t t t Then, Q Q E , M E 1 TI TI The complete Algorithm A considers all flow scenarios; space limitation precludes its inclusion, here.

C.1.3 Lane Assignment The unit problem is solved for each turn movement on each link. Therefore it is necessary to calculate a value, LN , of allocated lanes for each movement, x. If in fact all lanes are specified by, say, arrows painted on the pavement, either as full lanes or as lanes within a turn bay, then the problem is fully defined. If however there remain unchannelized lanes on a link, then an analysis is undertaken to subdivide the number of these physical lanes into turn movement specific virtual lanes, LNx.

C.2 Implementation C.2.1 Computational Procedure The computational procedure for this model is shown in the form of a flow diagram as Figure C4. As discussed earlier, the simulation model processes traffic flow for each link independently over TI that the analyst specifies; it is usually 60 seconds or longer. The first step is to execute an algorithm to define the sequence in which the network links are processed so that as many links as possible are processed after their feeder links are processed, within the same network sweep. Since a general network will have many closed loops, it is not possible to guarantee that every link processed will have all of its feeder links processed earlier.

The processing then continues as a succession of time steps of duration, TI, until the simulation is completed. Within each time step, the processing performs a series of sweeps over all network links; this is necessary to ensure that the traffic flow is synchronous over the entire network. Specifically, the sweep ensures continuity of flow among all the network links; in the context of this model, this means that the values of E, M, and S are all defined for each link such that they represent the synchronous movement of traffic from each link to all of its outbound links. These sweeps also serve to compute the metering rates that control spillback.

Within each sweep, processing solves the unit problem for each turn movement on each link.

With the turn movement percentages for each link provided by the DTRAD model, an algorithm Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

allocates the number of lanes to each movement serviced on each link. The timing at a signal, if any, applied at the downstream end of the link, is expressed as a G/C ratio, the signal timing needed to define this ratio is an input requirement for the model. The model also has the capability of representing, with macroscopic fidelity, the actions of actuated signals responding to the timevarying competing demands on the approaches to the intersection.

The solution of the unit problem yields the values of the number of vehicles, O, that discharge from the link over the time interval and the number of vehicles that remain on the link at the end of the time interval as stratified by queued and moving vehicles: Q and M . The procedure considers each movement separately (multipiping). After all network links are processed for a given network sweep, the updated consistent values of entering flows, E; metering rates, M; and source flows, S are defined so as to satisfy the no spillback condition.

The procedure then performs the unit problem solutions for all network links during the following sweep.

Experience has shown that the system converges (i.e. the values of E, M and S settle down for all network links) in just two sweeps if the network is entirely undersaturated or in four sweeps in the presence of extensive congestion with link spillback. (The initial sweep over each link uses the final values of E and M, of the prior TI). At the completion of the final sweep for a TI, the procedure computes and stores all measures of effectiveness for each link and turn movement for output purposes. It then prepares for the following time interval by defining the values of Q and M for the start of the next TI as being those values of Q and M at the end of the prior TI. In this manner, the simulation model processes the traffic flow over time until the end of the run. Note that there is no spacediscretization other than the specification of network links.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Sequence Network Links Next Timestep, of duration, TI A

Next sweep; Define E, M, S for all B

Links C Next Link D Next Turn Movement, x Get lanes, LNx Service Rate, Sx ; G/Cx Get inputs to Unit Problem:

Q b , Mb , E Solve Unit Problem: Q e , Me , O No D Last Movement ?

Yes No Last Link ? C Yes No B Last Sweep ?

Yes Calc., store all Link MOE Set up next TI :

No A Last Time - step ?

Yes DONE Figure C4. Flow of Simulation Processing (See Glossary: Table C3)

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

C.2.2 Interfacing with Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTRAD)

The DYNEV II system reflects NRC guidance that evacuees will seek to travel in a general direction away from the location of the hazardous event. Thus, an algorithm was developed to identify an appropriate set of destination nodes for each origin based on its location and on the expected direction of travel. This algorithm also supports the DTRAD model in dynamically varying the Trip Table (OD matrix) over time from one DTRAD session to the next.

Figure B1 depicts the interaction of the simulation model with the DTRAD model in the DYNEV II system. As indicated, DYNEV II performs a succession of DTRAD sessions; each such session computes the turn link percentages for each link that remain constant for the session duration, T , T , specified by the analyst. The end product is the assignment of traffic volumes from each origin to paths connecting it with its destinations in such a way as to minimize the networkwide cost function. The output of the DTRAD model is a set of updated link turn percentages which represent this assignment of traffic.

As indicated in Figure B1, the simulation model supports the DTRAD session by providing it with operational link MOE that are needed by the path choice model and included in the DTRAD cost function. These MOE represent the operational state of the network at a time, T T , which lies within the session duration, T , T . This burn time, T T , is selected by the analyst. For each DTRAD iteration, the simulation model computes the change in network operations over this burn time using the latest set of link turn percentages computed by the DTRAD model. Upon convergence of the DTRAD iterative procedure, the simulation model accepts the latest turn percentages provided by the DTA model, returns to the origin time, T , and executes until it arrives at the end of the DTRAD session duration at time, T . At this time the next DTA session is launched and the whole process repeats until the end of the DYNEV II run.

Additional details are presented in Appendix B.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant C16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

APPENDIX D Detailed Description of Study Procedure

D. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STUDY PROCEDURE This appendix describes the activities that were performed to compute Evacuation Time Estimates. The individual steps of this effort are represented as a flow diagram in Figure D1.

Each numbered step in the description that follows corresponds to the numbered element in the flow diagram.

Step 1 The first activity was to obtain EPZ boundary information and create a GIS base map. The base map extends beyond the Shadow Region which extends approximately 15 miles (radially) from the power plant location. The base map incorporates the local roadway topology, a suitable topographic background and the EPZ boundary.

Step 2 2010 Census block information was obtained in GIS format. This information was used to estimate the resident population within the EPZ and Shadow Region and to define the spatial distribution and demographic characteristics of the population within the study area. Employee data received from the Counties and from phone calls to major employers. Transient data were obtained from local emergency management agencies and from phone calls to transient attractions. Information concerning schools, medical and other types of special facilities within the EPZ was obtained from county and municipal sources.

Step 3 A kickoff meeting was conducted with major stakeholders (state and local emergency managers, onsite and offsite utility emergency managers, local and state law enforcement agencies). The purpose of the kickoff meeting was to present an overview of the work effort, identify key agency personnel, and indicate the data requirements for the study. Specific requests for information were presented to local emergency managers. Unique features of the study area were discussed to identify the local concerns that should be addressed by the ETE study.

Step 4 Next, a physical survey of the roadway system in the study area was conducted to determine the geometric properties of the highway sections, the channelization of lanes on each section of roadway, whether there are any turn restrictions or special treatment of traffic at intersections, the type and functioning of traffic control devices, gathering signal timings for pretimed traffic signals, and to make the necessary observations needed to estimate realistic values of roadway capacity.

Step 5 A telephone survey of households within the EPZ was conducted to identify household dynamics, trip generation characteristics, and evacuationrelated demographic information of the EPZ population. This information was used to determine important study factors including the average number of evacuating vehicles used by each household, and the time required to Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant D1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

perform preevacuation mobilization activities.

Step 6 A computerized representation of the physical roadway system, called a linknode analysis network, was developed using the UNITES software developed by KLD. Once the geometry of the network was completed, the network was calibrated using the information gathered during the road survey (Step 4). Estimates of highway capacity for each link and other linkspecific characteristics were introduced to the network description. Traffic signal timings were input accordingly. The linknode analysis network was imported into a GIS map. 2010 Census data were overlaid in the map, and origin centroids where trips would be generated during the evacuation process were assigned to appropriate links.

Step 7 The EPZ is subdivided into 8 Zones. Based on wind direction and speed, Regions (groupings of Zones) that may be advised to evacuate, were developed.

The need for evacuation can occur over a range of timeofday, dayofweek, seasonal and weatherrelated conditions. Scenarios were developed to capture the variation in evacuation demand, highway capacity and mobilization time, for different time of day, day of the week, time of year, and weather conditions.

Step 8 The input stream for the DYNEV II model, which integrates the dynamic traffic assignment and distribution model, DTRAD, with the evacuation simulation model, was created for a prototype evacuation case - the evacuation of the entire EPZ for a representative scenario.

Step 9 After creating this input stream, the DYNEV II System was executed on the prototype evacuation case to compute evacuating traffic routing patterns consistent with the appropriate NRC guidelines. DYNEV II contains an extensive suite of data diagnostics which check the completeness and consistency of the input data specified. The analyst reviews all warning and error messages produced by the model and then corrects the database to create an input stream that properly executes to completion.

The model assigns destinations to all origin centroids consistent with a (general) radial evacuation of the EPZ and Shadow Region. The analyst may optionally supplement and/or replace these modelassigned destinations, based on professional judgment, after studying the topology of the analysis highway network. The model produces link and networkwide measures of effectiveness as well as estimates of evacuation time.

Step 10 The results generated by the prototype evacuation case are critically examined. The examination includes observing the animated graphics (using the EVAN software which operates on data produced by DYNEV II) and reviewing the statistics output by the model. This is a laborintensive activity, requiring the direct participation of skilled engineers who possess Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant D2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

the necessary practical experience to interpret the results and to determine the causes of any problems reflected in the results.

Essentially, the approach is to identify those bottlenecks in the network that represent locations where congested conditions are pronounced and to identify the cause of this congestion. This cause can take many forms, either as excess demand due to high rates of trip generation, improper routing, a shortfall of capacity, or as a quantitative flaw in the way the physical system was represented in the input stream. This examination leads to one of two conclusions:

The results are satisfactory; or The input stream must be modified accordingly.

This decision requires, of course, the application of the user's judgment and experience based upon the results obtained in previous applications of the model and a comparison of the results of the latest prototype evacuation case iteration with the previous ones. If the results are satisfactory in the opinion of the user, then the process continues with Step 13. Otherwise, proceed to Step 11.

Step 11 There are many "treatments" available to the user in resolving apparent problems. These treatments range from decisions to reroute the traffic by assigning additional evacuation destinations for one or more sources, imposing turn restrictions where they can produce significant improvements in capacity, changing the control treatment at critical intersections so as to provide improved service for one or more movements, or in prescribing specific treatments for channelizing the flow so as to expedite the movement of traffic along major roadway systems. Such "treatments" take the form of modifications to the original prototype evacuation case input stream. All treatments are designed to improve the representation of evacuation behavior.

Step 12 As noted above, the changes to the input stream must be implemented to reflect the modifications undertaken in Step 11. At the completion of this activity, the process returns to Step 9 where the DYNEV II System is again executed.

Step 13 Evacuation of transitdependent evacuees and special facilities are included in the evacuation analysis. Fixed routing for transit buses and for school buses, ambulances, and other transit vehicles are introduced into the final prototype evacuation case data set. DYNEV II generates routespecific speeds over time for use in the estimation of evacuation times for the transit dependent and special facility population groups.

Step 14 The prototype evacuation case was used as the basis for generating all region and scenario specific evacuation cases to be simulated. This process was automated through the UNITES user interface. For each specific case, the population to be evacuated, the trip generation Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant D3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

distributions, the highway capacity and speeds, and other factors are adjusted to produce a customized casespecific data set.

Step 15 All evacuation cases are executed using the DYNEV II System to compute ETE. Once results were available, quality control procedures were used to assure the results were consistent, dynamic routing was reasonable, and traffic congestion/bottlenecks were addressed properly.

Step 16 Once vehicular evacuation results are accepted, average travel speeds for transit and special facility routes were used to compute evacuation time estimates for transitdependent permanent residents, schools, hospitals, and other special facilities.

Step 17 The simulation results are analyzed, tabulated and graphed. The results were then documented, as required by NUREG/CR7002.

Step 18 Following the completion of documentation activities, the ETE criteria checklist (see Appendix N) was completed. An appropriate report reference is provided for each criterion provided in the checklist.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant D4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

A Step 1 Step 10 Create GIS Base Map Examine Results of Prototype Evacuation Case using EVAN and DYNEV II Output Step 2 Gather Census Block and Demographic Data for Results Satisfactory Study Area Step 11 Step 3 Modify Evacuation Destinations and/or Develop Conduct Kickoff Meeting with Stakeholders Traffic Control Treatments Step 4 Step 12 Field Survey of Roadways within Study Area Modify Database to Reflect Changes to Prototype Evacuation Case Step 5 Conduct Telephone Survey and Develop Trip Generation Characteristics B

Step 13 Step 6 Establish Transit and Special Facility Evacuation Create and Calibrate LinkNode Analysis Network Routes and Update DYNEV II Database Step 14 Step 7 Generate DYNEV II Input Streams for All Evacuation Cases Develop Evacuation Regions and Scenarios Step 15 Step 8 Execute DYNEV II to Compute ETE for All Create and Debug DYNEV II Input Stream Evacuation Cases Step 16 Step 9 Use DYNEV II Average Speed Output to Compute ETE for Transit and Special Facility Routes B Execute DYNEV II for Prototype Evacuation Case Step 17 Documentation A Step 18 Complete ETE Criteria Checklist Figure D1. Flow Diagram of Activities Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant D5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

APPENDIX E Special Facility Data

E. SPECIAL FACILITY DATA The following tables list population information, as of September 2012, for special facilities, transient attractions and major employers that are located within the CCNPP EPZ. Special facilities are defined as schools, day care centers, and medical care facilities. Transient population data is included in the tables for recreational areas and lodging facilities.

Employment data is included in the tables for major employers. Each table is grouped by county. The location of the facility is defined by its straightline distance (miles) and direction (magnetic bearing) from the center point of the plant. Maps of each school, preschool and day care center, recreational area, marina, lodging facility, and major employer are also provided.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table E1. Schools within the EPZ Distance Dire Enroll Zone (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality Phone ment Staff CALVERT COUNTY 1 1.9 S Southern Middle School 9615 Hg Trueman Rd Lusby (410) 5357877 562 71 1 3.7 WNW St. Leonard Elementary School 5370 St Leonard Rd St. Leonard (410) 5357714 573 76 2 5.6 WNW Mutual Elementary School 1455 Ball Rd Port Republic (410) 5357700 510 62 3 4.0 S Appeal Elementary School 11655 Hg Trueman Rd Lusby (410) 5357800 435 60 3 5.4 S Dowell Elementary School 12680 Hg Trueman Rd Lusby (410) 5357802 673 75 12200 Southern Connector 3 5.0 S Mill Creek Middle School Lusby (410) 5357824 546 80 Blvd 3 7.6 S Our Lady Star of the Sea School 50 Alexander Ln Solomons (401) 3263171 194 25 3 4.0 S Patuxent Elementary School 35 Appeal Ln Lusby (410) 5357830 500 75 12485 Southern Connector 3 5.5 S Patuxent High School Lusby (410) 5357865 1,123 127 Blvd Calvert County Subtotals: 5,116 651 ST. MARY'S COUNTY Lexington 7 10.1 SSW Esperanza Middle School 22790 Maple Rd (301) 8634016 775 93 Park 46060 Millstone Landing Lexington 7 9.9 SSW Green Holly Elementary School (301) 8634064 547 96 Road Park 7 8.6 SW Hollywood Elementary School 44345 Joy Chapel Road Hollywood (301) 3734350 525 66 7 9.5 SW St John's Elementary School 43900 Saint Johns Rd Hollywood (301) 3732142 125 21 Lexington 7 9.4 SSW Town Creek Elementary School 45805 Dent Dr. (301) 8634044 231 37 Park St. Mary's County Subtotals: 2,203 313 TOTAL: 7,319 964 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table E2. Preschools and Daycares within the EPZ Distance Dire Enroll Zone (miles) ction School Name Street Address Municipality Phone ment Staff CALVERT COUNTY St. Leonard Elementary Before &

1 3.7 WNW 5370 St Leonard Rd St. Leonard (410) 5357714 15 N/A After School Program 1 3.1 S St. Paul's Preschool 11000 H.G Trueman Rd. Lusby (410) 3263615 35 6 2 4.5 NW Grover's Place Day Care 4740 Saint Leonard Rd St. Leonard (410) 5869364 59 4 Mutual Elementary Before & Port 2 5.6 WNW 1455 Ball Rd (410) 5357700 30 N/A After School Program Republic Dowell Elementary Before &

3 5.4 S 12680 Hg Trueman Rd Lusby (410) 5357802 30 N/A After School Program Our Lady Star of the Sea School 3 7.6 S 90 Alexander Ln Solomons (401) 3263171 49 2 (ASC)

Patuxent Elementary School 3 4.0 S (410) 3940200 N/A Before & After School Program 35 Appeal Lane Lusby 30 3 4.0 S Patuxent Head Start 35 Appeal Ln Lusby (410) 3940200 79 9 3 6.0 S Solomon's Day Care Center 105 Swaggers Point Rd Solomons (401) 3261433 86 18 Calvert County Subtotals: 413 39 TOTAL: 413 39 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table E3. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Ambul Wheel Bed Distance Dire Cap Current atory chair ridden Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Phone acity Census Patients Patients Patients CALVERT COUNTY 1 1.7 WSW 3 Beas' Assisted Living 544 Barnacle Ln Lusby (443) 5328936 6 6 4 1 1 2 3.5 WSW In God's Care, Inc. 2365 Delight Ct St. Leonard (443) 9682022 6 5 5 0 0 Asbury Solomons Island 11750 Asbury 3 6.3 SSW Solomons (410) 3943000 30 21 15 6 0 Assisted Living Circle Asbury Solomons Island 11100 Asbury 3 6.3 SSW Solomons (410) 3943000 48 41 13 27 1 Skilled Nursing Home Circle Solomons Nursing Center 3 6.1 S 13325 Dowell Rd Solomons (410) 3260077 87 84 8 70 6 Inc.

The Hermitage at St. John's 3 6.1 S 13325 Dowell Rd Solomons (410) 3260070 49 49 24 25 0 Creek Calvert Subtotals: 226 206 69 129 8 TOTAL: 226 206 69 129 8 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table E4. Major Employers within the EPZ Distance Dire Employees  % Non Employees Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Phone (max shift) EPZ (Non EPZ)

CALVERT COUNTY 1650 Calvert Cliffs 1 0.2 S CCNPP Lusby (410) 4953866 850 75% 638 Parkway 1 1.9 S Southern Middle School 9615 Hg Trueman Rd Lusby (410) 5357877 71 69% 49 St. Leonard Elementary 1 3.7 WNW 5370 St Leonard Rd St. Leonard (410) 5357714 76 69% 52 School Port 2 5.6 WNW Mutual Elementary School 1455 Ball Rd (410) 5357700 62 69% 43 Republic 11655 Hg Trueman 3 4.0 S Appeal Elementary School Lusby (410) 5357800 60 69% 41 Rd 3 8.0 S Chesapeake Biological Lab 1 William St Solomons (410) 3264281 121 69% 83 12680 Hg Trueman 3 5.4 S Dowell Elementary School Lusby (410) 5357802 75 69% 52 Rd Holiday Inn SolomonsConf 3 6.8 S 155 Holiday Drive Solomons (410) 3266311 70 10% 7 Center & Marina 12200 Southern 3 5.0 S Mill Creek Middle School Lusby (410) 5357824 80 69% 55 Connector Blvd 13855 Solomons 3 6.9 SSW Navy Recreation Center Solomons (410) 2865529 120 25% 30 Island Road 3 4.0 S Patuxent Elementary School 35 Appeal Ln Lusby (410) 5357830 75 69% 52 12485 Southern 3 5.5 S Patuxent High School Lusby (410) 5357865 127 69% 88 Connector Blvd 3 6.1 S Solomons Nursing Center 13325 Dowell Road Solomons (410) 3260077 55 69% 38 Calvert County Subtotals: 1,842 1,228 ST. MARY'S COUNTY 23481 Cottonwood 7 10.1 SSW BAE Systems California (301) 8629300 108 69% 75 Parkway 7 10.1 SSW BJ's Wholesale Club 44950 Worth Avenue California (301) 8620100 90 10% 9 24660 Three Notch 7 9.3 SW Burch Oil Co., Inc. Hollywood (301) 3732131 60 10% 6 Rd Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Distance Dire Employees  % Non Employees Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Phone (max shift) EPZ (Non EPZ)

Eagan, Mcallister Associates, 7 10.0 SSW 45310 Abell House Ln California (301) 8632204 280 69% 193 Inc.

7 10.3 SSW Eagle Systems Inc. 22560 Epic Dr # 100 California (301) 8632453 250 95% 238 Lexington 7 10.1 SSW Esperanza Middle School 22790 Maple Rd (301) 8634016 93 69% 64 Park Green Holly Elementary 46060 Millstone Lexington 7 9.9 SSW (301) 8634064 96 69% 66 School Landing Road Park Hollywood Elementary 44345 Joy Chapel 7 8.6 SW Hollywood (301) 3734350 66 69% 46 School Road 7 10.0 SSW Lowe's Home Improvement 45075 Worth Avenue California (301) 7370232 193 20% 39 46610 Expedition Dr Lexington 7 10.7 S Mantech (301) 8622200 375 20% 75

1. 101 Park 43865 Airport View 7 10.1 SW Northrop Grumman Hollywood (301) 3732360 200 69% 138 Drive 45310 Abell House 7 9.9 SSW SAIC Inc. California (301) 8626216 447 69% 308 Lane St. Mary's County Subtotals: 2,258 1,257 TOTAL: 4,100 2,485 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table E5. Recreational Attractions within the EPZ Distance Dire Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Phone Transients Vehicles CALVERT COUNTY 1 1.8 S BGE Field 9550 Hg Trueman Rd Lusby (410) 5351600 1,000 300 1 2.7 S Calvert Cliffs State Park 9500 H. G. Truman Pkwy. Lusby (301) 7437613 244 87 1 2.2 WNW Camp Bay Breeze 140 Walnut Cove Dr Lusby (310) 7437613 158 21 1 1.7 NW Flag Ponds Nature Park 1525 Flag Ponds Pkwy. Lusby (410) 5355327 200 50 2 5.8 W Brooms Island Community Center 4080 School Rd Broomes Island (410) 5351600 12 6 2 4.3 SW Jefferson Park & Museum 10115 Mackall Rd St. Leonard (410) 5868500 30 9 2 4.5 NW St. Leonard Recreation Area 4825 Maryland Ave St Leonard (410) 5351600 75 40 3 7.2 S Calvert Marine Museum 14200 Solomons Island Rd S Solomons (410) 3262042 201 58 3 3.6 SSE Chesapeake Hills Golf Club 11352 H.G. Trueman Rd Lusby (410) 5351600 6 4 3 3.5 SSE Cove Point Recreation Park 750 Cove Point Rd. Lusby (410) 5351600 1,500 800 3 6.9 SSW Navy Recreation Center 13855 Solomons Island Road Solomons (410) 2865529 3,000 800 3 5.9 S Solomons Town Center Park 13300 Dowell Rd Lusby (410) 5351600 250 200 3 3.7 S Southern Community Center 20 Appeal Lane Lusby (410) 5861101 300 150 4 9.0 WNW Battle Creek Cypress Swamp 2880 Grays Road Prince Frederick (410) 5355327 60 15 4 8.1 W Patuxent Camp Sites 4774 Williams Wharf Road Saint Leonard (410) 5351600 125 42 Calvert County Subtotals: 7,161 2,582 DORCHESTER COUNTY 8 6.6 ENE Taylors Island Family Campgrounds 4362 Bay Shore Road Taylors Island (410) 3973275 200 100 Dorchester County Subtotals: 200 100 ST. MARY'S COUNTY 6 10.8 SW Judge P.H. Dorsey Memorial Park 24275 Hollywood Rd Leonardtown (301) 4754200 650 150 7 6.5 SW Greenwell State Park 25420 Rosedale Manor Lane Hollywood (301) 3739775 275 125 7 8.5 SW Hollywood Soccer Complex Joy Chapel Rd Hollywood (301) 4754200 650 150 7 7.9 SSW Myrtle Point Park 24050 Patuxent Blvd California (301) 4754200 75 23 7 7.0 SW Sotterley Plantation 44300 Sotterley Ln Hollywood (301) 3732280 188 38 St. Mary's County Subtotals: 1,838 486 TOTAL: 9,199 3,168 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table E6. Marinas within the EPZ Distance Dire Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Phone Transients Vehicles CALVERT COUNTY 1 1.8 S Flag Harbor Yacht Haven 1565 Flag Harbor Boulevard St. Leonard (410) 5861915 56 20 1 2.7 S Vera's White Sands Marina 1200 White Sands Drive Lusby (410) 5861182 75 27 1 2.2 WNW Broomes Island Marina 3939 Oyster House Rd Broomes Island (410) 5862941 30 11 1 1.7 NW Len's Marina 8995 Broomes Island Road Broomes Island (410) 5860077 22 8 2 5.8 W Beacon Marina 255 Lore Road Solomons (410) 3266303 140 50 2 4.3 SW Bunky's Charter Boats 14448 Solomons Island Rd S Solomons (410) 3263241 31 11 2 4.5 NW Calvert Marina 14485 Dowell Road Solomons (410) 3264251 113 40 3 7.2 S Harbor Island Marina Inc. 105 Charles Street Solomons (410) 3263441 86 31 3 3.6 SSE K B Derr & Son 12565 Rousby Hall Road Lusby (410) 3267089 6 2 Solomon's Boat Ramp &

3 3.5 SSE Fishing Thomas Johnson Rd Solomons N/A 140 50 3 6.9 SSW Solomons Harbor Marina LLC 205 Holiday Drive Solomons (410) 3261052 56 20 3 5.9 S Solomons Yachting Center 255 Alexander Street Solomons (410) 3262401 134 48 3 3.7 S Spring Cove Marina 455 Lore Road Solomons (410) 3262161 78 28 4 9.0 WNW Zahniser's Yachting Center 245 C Street Solomons (410) 3262166 238 85 Nans Cove Canoe/Kayak 4 8.1 W Launch 7955 Broomes Island Rd Broomes Island (410) 5351600 0 0 Calvert County Subtotals: 1,205 431 DORCHESTER COUNTY 8 8.2 ENE Island Grille Marina 514 Taylors Island Rd Taylors Island (410) 2289094 70 25 8 8.9 ENE Slaughter Creek Marina 638 Taylors Island Road Taylors Island (410) 2210050 17 6 Dorchester County Subtotals: 87 31 ST. MARY'S COUNTY 7 7.0 SSW Blackstone Marina 24845 Marina Way Hollywood (301) 3732015 41 14 7 8.1 SSW Boatel California 23950 North Patuxent Beach Road California (301) 7371400 40 14 Weeks Marine Railway &

7 7.1 SW Marina 45046 Blackistone Circle Hollywood (301) 3738710 31 11 St. Mary's County Subtotals: 112 39 TOTAL: 1,404 501 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table E7. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Distance Dire Zone (miles) ction Facility Name Street Address Municipality Phone Transients Vehicles CALVERT COUNTY 2 4.5 NW Cliff's Motor Inn 4785 Saint Leonard Rd St. Leonard 4105861514 32 16 3 7.1 S Comfort Inn Beacon Marina 255 Lore Road Solomons (410) 3266303 120 60 3 5.9 S Hilton Garden Inn Solomons 13100 Dowell Road Solomons (410) 2315076 113 75 3 6.8 S Holiday Inn Solomons 155 Holiday Drive Solomons (410) 3266311 652 326 3 7.8 S Locust Inn 14478 Solomons Island Rd S Solomons 4103269817 16 8 Holiday Inn Express Prince 4 10.5 NW 355 Merrimac Court Prince Frederick (410) 5356800 172 49 Frederick 4 10.3 NW SpringHill Suites by Marriot 75 Sherry Lane Prince Frederick (443) 9683000 104 52 Calvert County Subtotals: 1,209 586 ST. MARY'S COUNTY Extended Stay America Lexington 7 10.8 S Park Pax River 46565 Expedition Park Drive Lexington Park (240) 7250100 147 147 Fairfield Inn Lexington Park 7 10.9 S Patuxent River Naval 22119 Three Notch Road Lexington Park (301) 8632113 171 57 7 10.9 S Hampton Inn Lexington Park 22211 Three Notch Road Lexington Park (301) 8633200 222 111 7 10.2 SSW La Quinta Inn 22769 Three Notch Road California (866) 5390036 224 112 7 9.8 SSW Sleep Inn & Suites 23428 Three Notch Road California (301) 7370000 65 32 7 10.2 SSW Super 8 Lexington Park 22801 Three Notch Road California 3018629822 110 37 7 10.4 S TownePlace Suites 22520 Three Notch Road Lexington Park (301) 8631111 211 70 St. Mary's County Subtotals: 1,150 566 TOTAL: 2,359 1,152 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure E1. Schools within the EPZ Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure E2. Preschools & Daycares within the EPZ Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure E3. Medical Facilities within the EPZ Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure E4. Major Employers within the EPZ Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

a Figure E5. Recreational Areas within the EPZ Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure E6. Marinas within the EPZ Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure E7. Lodging Facilities within the EPZ Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant E16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

APPENDIX F Telephone Survey

F. TELEPHONE SURVEY F.1 Introduction The development of evacuation time estimates for the CCNPP EPZ requires the identification of travel patterns, car ownership and household size of the population within the EPZ.

Demographic information can be obtained from Census data. The use of this data has several limitations when applied to emergency planning. First, the Census data do not encompass the range of information needed to identify the time required for preliminary activities (mobilization) that must be undertaken prior to evacuating the area. Secondly, Census data do not contain attitudinal responses needed from the population of the EPZ and consequently may not accurately represent the anticipated behavioral characteristics of the evacuating populace.

These concerns are addressed by conducting a telephone survey of a representative sample of the EPZ population. The survey is designed to elicit information from the public concerning family demographics and estimates of response times to well defined events. The design of the survey includes a limited number of questions of the form What would you do if ? and other questions regarding activities with which the respondent is familiar (How long does it take you to ?)

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

F.2 Survey Instrument and Sampling Plan Attachment A presents the final survey instrument used in this study. A draft of the instrument was submitted to stakeholders for comment. Comments were received and the survey instrument was modified accordingly, prior to conducting the survey.

Following the completion of the instrument, a sampling plan was developed. A sample size of approximately 500 completed survey forms yields results with a sampling error of +/-4.5% at the 95% confidence level. The sample must be drawn from the EPZ population. Consequently, a list of zip codes in the EPZ was developed using GIS software. This list is shown in Table F1. Along with each zip code, an estimate of the population and number of households in each area was determined by overlaying Census data and the EPZ boundary, again using GIS software. The proportional number of desired completed survey interviews for each area was identified, as shown in Table F1. Note that the average household size computed in Table F1 was an estimate for sampling purposes and was not used in the ETE study. The completed survey adhered to the sampling plan.

The survey discussed herein was performed in 2007. The EPZ population has increased by about 17 percent (7,519 people) between the 2000 and 2010 Census (see Section 3.1). In the intervening period, the distribution pattern of population within the EPZ has not changed significantly, nor has the nature of the EPZ. Consequently, the use of 2007 telephone survey sampling plan and results can be justified.

Table F1. CCNPP Telephone Survey Sampling Plan Population Required Population Required Change within EPZ Sample within EPZ Sample Sample Zip Code (2000) (2000) (2010) (2010) Size 21648 5 0 3 0 0 20670 0 0 3 0 0 21622 70 1 32 0 1 21669 220 3 227 3 0 20615 401 5 338 3 2 20659 1,026 12 1,549 14 2 20688 1,796 25 2,368 32 7 20653 2,270 24 2,439 23 1 20619 2,226 33 2,981 37 4 20676 3,092 33 3,958 36 3 20678 3,846 41 5,140 46 5 20685 5,597 60 6,415 58 2 20636 6,494 74 6,772 66 8 20657 18,090 189 20,427 182 7 Average Household Size: 2.8 2.8 Total Sample Required: 500 500 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

F.3 Survey Results The results of the survey fall into two categories. First, the household demographics of the area can be identified. Demographic information includes such factors as household size, automobile ownership, and automobile availability. The distributions of the time to perform certain pre evacuation activities are the second category of survey results. These data are processed to develop the trip generation distributions used in the evacuation modeling effort, as discussed in Section 5.

A review of the survey instrument reveals that several questions have a dont know (DK) or refused entry for a response. It is accepted practice in conducting surveys of this type to accept the answers of a respondent who offers a DK response for a few questions or who refuses to answer a few questions. To address the issue of occasional DK/refused responses from a large sample, the practice is to assume that the distribution of these responses is the same as the underlying distribution of the positive responses. In effect, the DK/refused responses are ignored and the distributions are based upon the positive data that is acquired.

F.3.1 Household Demographic Results Household Size Figure F1 presents the distribution of household size within the EPZ. The average household contains 2.80 people. This is the same value as the estimated household size, drawn from Census data, used to determine the survey sample (Table F1). The close agreement between the average household size obtained from the survey and from the Census is an indication of the reliability of the survey.

CCNPP Household Size 40%

30%

% of Households 20%

10%

0%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+

Household Size Figure F1. Household Size in the EPZ Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Automobile Ownership The average number of automobiles available per household in the EPZ is 2.30. It should be noted that approximately 2.55 percent of households do not have access to an automobile. The distribution of automobile ownership is presented in Figure F2. Figure F3 and Figure F4 present the automobile availability by household size. Note that the majority of households without access to a car are single person households. As expected, nearly all households of 2 or more people have access to at least one vehicle.

CCNPP Vehicle Availability 50%

40%

% of Households 30%

20%

10%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+

Number of Vehicles Figure F2. Household Vehicle Availability Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 15 Person Households 1 Person 2 People 3 People 4 People 5 People 100%

80%

% of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+

Vehicles Figure F3. Vehicle Availability 1 to 5 Person Households Distribution of Vehicles by HH Size 69+ Person Households 6 People 7 People 8 People 9+ People 100%

80%

% of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Vehicles Figure F4. Vehicle Availability 6 to 9+ Person Households Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Commuters Figure F5 presents the distribution of the number of commuters in each household.

Commuters are defined as household members who travel to work or college on a daily basis.

The data shows an average of 1.13 commuters in each household in the EPZ, and 65% of households have at least one commuter.

CCNPP Commuters 50%

40%

% of Households 30%

20%

10%

0%

0 1 2 3 4+

Number of Commuters Figure F5. Commuters in Households in the EPZ Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Commuter Travel Modes Figure F6 presents the mode of travel that commuters use on a daily basis. The vast majority of commuters use their private automobiles to travel to work. The data shows an average of 1.03 employees per vehicle, assuming 2 people per vehicle - on average - for carpools.

CCNPP Travel Mode to Work 100% 94.5%

80%

% of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0.0% 1.9% 0.6% 2.9%

0%

Rail Bus Walk/Bike 1Pers Veh Carpool Mode of Travel Figure F6. Modes of Travel in the EPZ F.3.2 Evacuation Response Several questions were asked to gauge the populations response to an emergency. These are now discussed:

How many of the vehicles would your household use during an evacuation? The response is shown in Figure F7. On average, evacuating households would use 1.46 vehicles.

Would you await the return of other family members prior to evacuating the area? Of the survey participants who responded, 58 percent said they would await the return of other family members before evacuating and 42 percent indicated that they would not await the return of other family members.

Would you take household pets with you if you were asked to evacuate the area? Based on the responses to the survey, 72 percent of households have a family pet. Of the households with pets, 82 percent of them indicated that they would take their pets with them, as shown in Figure F8.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Vehicles Used for Evacuation 100%

80%

60%

% of Households 40%

20%

0%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+

Number of Vehicles Figure F7. Number of Vehicles Used for Evacuation Households Evacuating with Pets 100%

80%

% of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

DK/Refused/No Pets Yes No Figure F8. Households Evacuating with Pets Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

F.3.3 Time Distribution Results The survey asked several questions about the amount of time it takes to perform certain pre evacuation activities. These activities involve actions taken by residents during the course of their daytoday lives. Thus, the answers fall within the realm of the responders experience.

The mobilization distributions provided below are the result of having applied the analysis described in Section 5.4.1 on the component activities of the mobilization.

How long does it take the commuter to complete preparation for leaving work? Figure F9 presents the cumulative distribution; in all cases, the activity is completed by about 120 minutes. Eightyfive percent can leave within 40 minutes.

Time to Prepare to Leave Work/School 100%

80%

% of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F9. Time Required to Prepare to Leave Work/School How long would it take the commuter to travel home? Figure F10 presents the work to home travel time for the EPZ. About 70 percent of commuters can arrive home within about 40 minutes of leaving work; all within 120 minutes.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Work to Home Travel 100%

80%

% of Commuters 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Travel Time (min)

Figure F10. Work to Home Travel Time Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

How long would it take the family to pack clothing, secure the house, and load the car?

Figure F11 presents the time required to prepare for leaving on an evacuation trip. In many ways this activity mimics a familys preparation for a short holiday or weekend away from home. Hence, the responses represent the experience of the responder in performing similar activities.

The distribution shown in Figure F11 has a long tail. About 90 percent of households can be ready to leave home within 60 minutes; the remaining households require up to an additional two hours and 15 minutes.

Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation 100%

80%

% of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 Preparation Time (min)

Figure F11. Time to Prepare Home for Evacuation Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

How long would it take you to clear 6 to 8 inches of snow from your driveway? During adverse, snowy weather conditions, an additional activity must be performed before residents can depart on the evacuation trip. Although snow scenarios assume that the roads and highways have been plowed and are passable (albeit at lower speeds and capacities), it may be necessary to clear a private driveway prior to leaving the home so that the vehicle can access the street. Figure F12 presents the time distribution for removing 6 to 8 inches of snow from a driveway. The time distribution for clearing the driveway has a long tail; about 90 percent of driveways are passable within 60 minutes. The last driveway is cleared two and a half hours after the start of this activity. Note that some of the respondents who answered under 15 minutes would likely not shovel at all and essentially drive through the snow on the driveway to access the roadway and begin their evacuation trip.

Time to Remove Snow from Driveway 100%

80%

% of Households 60%

40%

20%

0%

0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 Time (min)

Figure F12. Time to Clear Driveway of 6"8" of Snow F.4 Conclusions The telephone survey provides valuable, relevant data associated with the EPZ population, which have been used to quantify demographics specific to the EPZ, and mobilization time which can influence evacuation time estimates.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

ATTACHMENT A Telephone Survey Instrument Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Survey Instrument Hello, my name is _______________ and I'm working COL.1 Unused on a survey being made for [insert marketing firm COL.2 Unused name] designed to identify local travel patterns COL.3 Unused in your area. The information obtained will be COL.4 Unused used in a traffic engineering study and in COL.5 Unused connection with an update of the countys emergency response plans. Your participation in this survey will greatly enhance the countys emergency preparedness program. Sex COL. 8 1 Male 2 Female INTERVIEWER: ASK TO SPEAK TO THE HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD OR THE SPOUSE OF THE HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD.

(Terminate call if not a residence)

DO NOT ASK:

1A. Record area code. To Be Determined COL. 9-11 1B. Record exchange number. To Be Determined COL. 12-14

2. What is your home Zip Code Col. 15-19

3. In total, how many cars, or other vehicles COL.20 are usually available to the household? 1 ONE (DO NOT READ ANSWERS.) 2 TWO 3 THREE 4 FOUR 5 FIVE 6 SIX 7 SEVEN 8 EIGHT 9 NINE OR MORE 0 ZERO (NONE)

X REFUSED

4. How many people usually live in this COL.21 COL.22 household? (DO NOT READ ANSWERS.) 1 ONE 0 TEN 2 TWO 1 ELEVEN 3 THREE 2 TWELVE 4 FOUR 3 THIRTEEN 5 FIVE 4 FOURTEEN 6 SIX 5 FIFTEEN 7 SEVEN 6 SIXTEEN 8 EIGHT 7 SEVENTEEN 9 NINE 8 EIGHTEEN 9 NINETEEN OR MORE X REFUSED Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

5. How many children living in this COL.23 household go to local public, 0 ZERO private, or parochial schools? 1 ONE (DO NOT READ ANSWERS.) 2 TWO 3 THREE 4 FOUR 5 FIVE 6 SIX 7 SEVEN 8 EIGHT 9 NINE OR MORE X REFUSED

6. How many people in the household COL.24 SKIP TO commute to a job, or to college, 0 ZERO Q. 12 at least 4 times a week? 1 ONE Q. 7 2 TWO Q. 7 3 THREE Q. 7 4 FOUR OR MORE Q. 7 5 DON'T KNOW/REFUSED Q. 12 INTERVIEWER: For each person identified in Question 6, ask Questions 7, 8, 9, and 10.

7. Thinking about commuter #1, how does that person usually travel to work or college?

(REPEAT QUESTION FOR EACH COMMUTER.)

Commuter #1 Commuter #2 Commuter #3 Commuter #4 COL.25 COL.26 COL.27 COL.28 Rail 1 1 1 1 Bus 2 2 2 2 Walk/Bicycle 3 3 3 3 Driver Car/Van 4 4 4 4 Park & Ride (Car/Rail, Xpress_bus) 5 5 5 5 Driver Carpool-2 or more people 6 6 6 6 Passenger Carpool-2 or more people 7 7 7 7 Taxi 8 8 8 8 Refused 9 9 9 9 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

8. What is the name of the city, town or community in which Commuter #1 works or attends school? (REPEAT QUESTION FOR EACH COMMUTER.) (FILL IN ANSWER.)

COMMUTER #1 COMMUTER #2 COMMUTER #3 COMMUTER #4 City/Town State City/Town State City/Town State City/Town State COL.29 COL.30 COL.31 COL.32 COL.33 COL.34 COL.35 COL.36 COL.37 COL.38 COL.39 COL.40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

9. How long would it take Commuter #1 to travel home from work or college?

(REPEAT QUESTION FOR EACH COMMUTER.) (DO NOT READ ANSWERS.)

COMMUTER #1 COMMUTER #2 COL.41 COL.42 COL.43 COL.44 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 9 41-45 MINUTES HOUR 30 MINUTES 9 41-45 MINUTES HOUR 30 MINUTES 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES HOUR 45 MINUTES 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS (SPECIFY _____) (SPECIFY _____)

9 9 0 0 X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED COMMUTER #3 COMMUTER #4 COL.45 COL.46 COL.47 COL.48 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 9 41-45 MINUTES HOUR 30 MINUTES 9 41-45 MINUTES HOUR 30 MINUTES 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES HOUR 45 MINUTES 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS (SPECIFY _____) (SPECIFY _____)

9 9 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

0 0 X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED

10. Approximately how long does it take Commuter #1 to complete preparation for leaving work or college prior to starting the trip home? (REPEAT QUESTION FOR EACH COMMUTER.)

(DO NOT READ ANSWERS.)

COMMUTER #1 COMMUTER #2 COL. 49 COL.50 COL.51 COL. 52 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 9 41-45 MINUTES HOUR 30 MINUTES 9 41-45 MINUTES HOUR 30 MINUTES 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES HOUR 45 MINUTES 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS (SPECIFY _____) (SPECIFY _____)

9 9 0 0 X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED COMMUTER #3 COMMUTER #4 COL. 53 COL. 54 COL. 55 COL. 56 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 1 5 MINUTES OR LESS 1 46-50 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 2 6-10 MINUTES 2 51-55 MINUTES 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 3 11-15 MINUTES 3 56 - 1 HOUR 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 4 16-20 MINUTES 4 OVER 1 HOUR, BUT 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 5 21-25 MINUTES LESS THAN 1 HOUR 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 6 26-30 MINUTES 15 MINUTES 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 31-35 MINUTES 5 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 8 36-40 MINUTES 16 MINUTES AND 1 9 41-45 MINUTES HOUR 30 MINUTES 9 41-45 MINUTES HOUR 30 MINUTES 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 6 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES AND 1 31 MINUTES AND 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES HOUR 45 MINUTES 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 7 BETWEEN 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES AND 46 MINUTES AND 2 HOURS 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS 8 OVER 2 HOURS (SPECIFY _____) (SPECIFY _____)

9 9 0 0 X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED X DON'T KNOW/REFUSED Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

11. When the commuters are away from home, is there a vehicle at home that is available for evacuation during any emergency? Col. 57 1 Yes 2 No 3 Dont Know/Refused

12. Would you await the return of family members prior to evacuating the area? Col. 58 1 Yes 2 No 3 Dont Know/Refused

13. How many of the vehicles that are usually available to the household would your family use during an evacuation? COL.59 (DO NOT READ ANSWERS.) 1 ONE 2 TWO 3 THREE 4 FOUR 5 FIVE 6 SIX 7 SEVEN 8 EIGHT 9 NINE OR MORE 0 ZERO (NONE)

X REFUSED

14. How long would it take the family to pack clothing, secure the house, load the car, and complete preparations prior to evacuating the area? (DO NOT READ ANSWERS.)

COL.60 COL.61 1 LESS THAN 15 MINUTES 1 3 HOURS TO 3 HOURS 15 MINUTES 2 15-30 MINUTES 2 3 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 30 MINUTES 3 31-45 MINUTES 3 3 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS 45 MINUTES 4 46 MINUTES - 1 HOUR 4 3 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 5 1 HOUR TO 1 HOUR 15 MINUTES 5 4 HOURS TO 4 HOURS 15 MINUTES 6 1 HOUR 16 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES 6 4 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 30 MINUTES 7 1 HOUR 31 MINUTES TO 1 HOUR 45 MINUTES 7 4 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 4 HOURS 45 MINUTES 8 1 HOUR 46 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 8 4 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 5 HOURS 9 2 HOURS TO 2 HOURS 15 MINUTES 9 5 HOURS TO 5 HOURS 15 MINUTES 0 2 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 30 MINUTES 0 5 HOURS 16 MINUTES TO 5 HOURS 30 MINUTES X 2 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 2 HOURS 45 MINUTES X 5 HOURS 31 MINUTES TO 5 HOURS 45 MINUTES Y 2 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 3 HOURS Y 5 HOURS 46 MINUTES TO 6 HOURS COL.62 1 DON'T KNOW Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

15. Would you take household pets with you if you were asked to evacuate the area?

Col. 58 1 Yes 2 No 3 Dont Know/Refused Thank you very much. _______________________________________

(TELEPHONE NUMBER CALLED)

If requested: Telephone For Additional information County Number Contact your County Emergency Management Office Calvert (410)535-1600 Dorchester (410)228-1818 St. Marys (301)475-4200 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant F19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

APPENDIX G Traffic Management Plan

G. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN NUREG/CR7002 indicates that the existing TCPs and ACPs identified by the offsite agencies should be used in the evacuation simulation modeling. The traffic and access control plans for the EPZ were provided by each county.

These plans were reviewed and the TCPs and ACPs were modeled accordingly.

G.1 Traffic and Access Control Points As discussed in Section 9, traffic control points at intersections (which are controlled) are modeled as actuated signals. If an intersection has a pretimed signal, stop, or yield control, and the intersection is identified as a traffic control point, the control type was changed to an actuated signal in the DYNEV II system. Table K2 provides the control type and node number for those nodes which are controlled. If the existing control was changed due to the point being a Traffic Control Point, the control type is indicated as a TCP in Table K2.

Figure G1 maps the ACPs identified in the county emergency plans. These TCPs and ACPS are concentrated along MD 2/4 and MD 235, the congested areas/roadways in Section 7.3. These TCPs and ACPs would be manned during evacuation by traffic guides who would direct evacuees in the proper direction and facilitate the flow of traffic through the intersections.

The animation of evacuation traffic conditions reveals critical intersections which could be bottlenecks during evacuation. These critical intersections were crosschecked with the list of TCPs and ACPs provided by Calvert County. All of the intersections are identified as TCPs/ACPs.

As shown in Figure G2, MD 2/4 intersects MD 235. This is a crucial intersection as it services all evacuees that travel south over the Thomas Johnson Bridge into St. Marys County. The layout of the intersection has one single lane continuing straight through to St. Andrews Church Road and a channelized right turn onto MD 235 northbound. St. Andrews Church Road drops to one lane just south of this intersection, whereas MD 235 has two moving lanes through the EPZ boundary. Although MD 235 remains within the EPZ through Zones 6 and 7 (for approximately 7 miles) using this route expedites a largescale (e.g. full EPZ) evacuation (see the sensitivity study on page M8). Therefore, it is recommended that multiple police officers facilitate the intersection in a way that the single through lane has the flexibility to be used as a shared right plus through lane should the congestion on St. Andrews Church Road build up. This would enable better utilization of MD 235. Access to MD 235 southbound from MD 2/4 should be prohibited as well as access to MD 2/4 from MD 235.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant G1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure G1. Traffic/Access Control Points for the CCNPP Site Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant G2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Key TCP MOVEMENT FACILITATED TOWN: CALIFORNIA MOVEMENT DISCOURAGED/DIVERTED LOCATION: State Highway 235 & State Highway 4 TRAFFIC GUIDE 2 ft ID: S-8 STOP SIGN ERPA: 7 3 ft TRAFFIC BARRICADE COUNTY: St. Mary's STHY 4/ 2 PER LANE (LOCAL ROADS AND RAMPS)

Patuxent Beach Rd 4 PER LANE (FREEWAY AND RAMPS)

TRAFFIC SIGNAL TRAFFIC CONES SPACED TO DISCOURAGE TRAFFIC BUT ALLOW PASSAGE (3 PER LANE):

STHY 235 8 ft Three Notch Rd Description

1. Discourage northbound movement along State Hwy 4.

MANPOWER/EQUIPMENT ESTIMATE 6 Traffic Guide(s) 9 Traffic Cones LOCATION PRIORITY 1

N St Andrews Church Rd **Traffic Guide should position himself safely Figure G2. Intersection of MD 235 and MD 4 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant G3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

APPENDIX H Evacuation Regions

H EVACUATION REGIONS This appendix presents the evacuation percentages for each Evacuation Region (Table H1) and maps of all Evacuation Regions. The percentages presented in Table H1 are based on the methodology discussed in assumption 5 of Section 2.2 and shown in Figure 21.

Note the baseline ETE study assumes 20 percent of households will not comply with the shelter advisory, as per Section 2.5.2 of NUREG/CR7002.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table H1. Percent of Zone Population Evacuating for Regions Zone Region Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R01 2Mile Radius 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R02 5Mile Radius 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R03 Full EPZ 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

R04 Dorchester County 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100%

Evacuate 2Mile Radius and Downwind to 5 Miles Zone Region Wind Direction From: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R05 NW, NNW, N, NNE 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

N/A NE Refer to Region R02 R06 ENE, E, ESE, SE, SSE 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

S, SSW, SW, WSW, W, N/A WNW Refer to Region R01 Evacuate 5Mile Radius and Downwind to the EPZ Boundary Zone Region Wind Direction From: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R07 N 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 100% 20%

R08 NNE, NE 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 100% 100% 20%

R09 ENE 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 100% 20%

R10 E 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20%

R11 ESE 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20%

R12 SE, SSE 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R13 S 100% 100% 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20%

R14 SW, WSW, W, WNW 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 100%

N/A SSW, NW, NNW Refer to Region R02 Staged Evacuation 2Mile Radius Evacuates, then Evacuate Downwind to 5 Miles Zone Region Wind Direction From: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R15 NW, NNW, N, NNE 100% 20% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R16 NE, 100% 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

R17 ENE, E, ESE, SE, SSE 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

S, SSW, SW, WSW,W, N/A WNW Refer to Region R01 ShelterinPlace until 90% ETE for R01, Zone(s) ShelterinPlace then Evacuate Zone(s) Evacuate Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H1. Region R01 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H2. Region R02 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H3. Region R03 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H4. Region R04 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H5. Region R05 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H6. Region R06 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H7. Region R07 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H8. Region R08 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H9. Region R09 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H10. Region R10 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H11. Region R11 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H12. Region R12 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H13. Region R13 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H14. Region R14 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H15. Region R15 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H16. Region R16 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure H17. Region R17 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant H19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

APPENDIX J Representative Inputs to and Outputs from the DYNEV II System

J. REPRESENTATIVE INPUTS TO AND OUTPUTS FROM THE DYNEV II SYSTEM This appendix presents data input to and output from the DYNEV II System. Table J1 provides the volume and queues for the ten highest volume signalized intersections in the study area.

Refer to Table K2 and the figures in Appendix K for a map showing the geographic location of each intersection.

Table J2 provides source (vehicle loading) and destination information for several roadway segments (links) in the analysis network. Refer to Table K1 and the figures in Appendix K for a map showing the geographic location of each link.

Table J3 provides network-wide statistics (average travel time, average speed and number of vehicles) for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) for each scenario. As expected, snow and rain cases have lower average speeds than their good weather counterpart.

Table J4 provides statistics (average speed and travel time) for the major evacuation routes -

MD 2/4 and MD 235 - for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 1 conditions. As discussed in Section 7.3 and shown in Figures 73 through 78, MD 2/4 southbound is congested for most of the evacuation. As such, the average speeds are comparably slower (and travel times longer) than other evacuation routes. The speeds on both northbound and southbound MD 2/4 are lowest during the second hour, however, northbound the speeds quickly recover, whereas southbound they remain below 20mph for 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />.

Table J5 provides the cumulative number of vehicles discharged and the cumulative percent of total vehicles discharged for each link exiting the analysis network, for an evacuation of the entire EPZ (Region R03) under Scenario 1 conditions. Refer to Table K1 and the figures in Appendix K for a map showing the geographic location of each link.

Figure J1 through Figure J15 plot the trip generation time versus the ETE for each of the 15 Scenarios considered. The distance between the trip generation and ETE curves is the travel time. Plots of trip generation versus ETE are indicative of the level of traffic congestion during evacuation. For low population density sites, the curves are close together, indicating short travel times and minimal traffic congestion. For higher population density sites, the curves are farther apart indicating longer travel times and the presence of traffic congestion. As seen in Figure J1 through Figure J14, the curves are spatially separated as a result of the traffic congestion in the EPZ, which was discussed in detail in Section 7.3.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table J1. Characteristics of the Ten Highest Volume Signalized Intersections Total Intersection Approach Volume Max. Turn Node Location Control (Up Node) (Veh) Queue (Veh) 309 11,975 151 316 11 0 71 MD 245 & MD 235 A 480 1,284 29 TOTAL 13,270 320 329 3 325 12,493 47 73 MD 472 & MD 235 A 74 42 0 TOTAL 12,864 321 235 1 318 12,392 13 319 MD 235 & S Sandgates Rd A 570 10 0 TOTAL 12,637 75 12,533 44 333 4 0 76 MD 235 & MD 5 A 363 56 0 TOTAL 12,593 76 12,582 28 545 3 0 333 MD 5 & Mechanicsville Rd A 362 0 0 TOTAL 12,585 84 113 0 516 MD 5 & New Market Rd A 549 12,388 0 TOTAL 12,501 316 11,790 106 319 10 0 318 MD 235 & Jones Wharf Rd A 324 588 14 TOTAL 12,388 578 8,675 527 45 3,251 267 16 MD 235 and MD 4 A 68 8 0 67 0 0 TOTAL 11,934 82 11,795 0 81 MD 5 & Merchant Ln A 518 0 0 TOTAL 11,795 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Total Intersection Approach Volume Max. Turn Node Location Control (Up Node) (Veh) Queue (Veh) 317 357 4 MD 235 & Old Three Notch 71 11,420 35 316 A Rd 318 11 0 TOTAL 11,788 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table J2. Sample Simulation Model Input Vehicles Entering Link Network Directional Destination Destination Number on this Link Preference Nodes Capacity 8367 1,698 5 5 S 8292 1,698 8366 1,698 8352 5,715 134 26 W 8334 3,396 8547 1,698 8096 3,810 218 242 NW 8094 1,698 268 453 S 8352 5,715 321 744 S 8352 5,715 8367 1,698 364 277 S 8292 1,698 8366 1,698 8367 1,698 401 89 SW 8292 1,698 8096 3,810 454 165 NW 8094 1,698 8334 3,396 515 466 S 8547 1,698 8367 1,698 8094 1,698 546 447 NW 8096 3,810 8348 1,698 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table J3. Selected Model Outputs for the Evacuation of the Entire EPZ Scenarios (Region R03)

Scenario 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NetworkWide Average 4.0 4.7 4.7 5.4 4.1 3.8 4.4 4.6 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 15.0 12.7 12.9 11.1 14.8 15.8 13.5 13.1 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 40,789 40,786 40,905 40,914 36,992 39,945 39,898 39,324 Exiting Network Scenario 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NetworkWide Average 4.2 5.0 4.9 3.9 5.0 4.3 4.5 Travel Time (Min/VehMi)

NetworkWide Average 14.3 12.1 12.1 15.4 11.9 14.0 13.2 Speed (mph)

Total Vehicles 37,817 37,797 36,888 36,411 52,303 43,361 41,094 Exiting Network Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table J4. Average Speed (mph) and Travel Time (min) for Major Evacuation Routes (Region R03, Scenario 1)

Elapsed Time (hours) 1 2 3 4 Travel Length Speed Time Travel Travel Travel Name (miles) (mph) (min) Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time MD 2/4 Northbound 22.2 50.8 26.2 11.0 121.1 56.0 23.7 61.3 21.7 MD 2/4 Southbound 22.2 8.9 149.9 5.5 243.7 10.1 131.0 12.7 104.9 MD 235 Northbound 12.8 16.9 45.6 27.9 27.6 49.6 15.5 49.0 15.7 MD 235 Southbound 12.8 58.7 13.1 54.3 14.2 60.0 12.8 60.0 12.8 6 7 8 9 MD 2/4 Northbound 22.2 63.6 20.9 63.6 20.9 63.6 20.9 63.6 20.9 MD 2/4 Southbound 22.2 14.6 90.8 17.4 76.4 20.9 63.7 64.1 20.7 MD 235 Northbound 12.8 56.6 13.6 56.6 13.6 56.6 13.6 59.8 12.9 MD 235 Southbound 12.8 60.0 12.8 60.0 12.8 60.0 12.8 60.0 12.8 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table J5. Simulation Model Outputs at Network Exit Links for Region R03, Scenario 1 Elapsed Time (hours)

EPZ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Exit Link Cumulative Vehicles Discharged by the Indicated Time Cumulative Percent of Vehicles Discharged During the Indicated Time Interval 782 2,114 3,237 4,064 4,661 5,035 5,400 5,761 6,066 139 15% 13% 12% 12% 13% 14% 14% 15% 15%

845 2,105 3,465 4,625 5,449 5,915 6,352 6,794 7,139 140 16% 13% 13% 14% 16% 16% 17% 17% 18%

115 1,919 2,960 3,314 3,323 3,324 3,325 3,326 3,327 146 2% 12% 11% 10% 9% 9% 9% 8% 8%

714 1,823 2,851 3,661 3,719 3,722 3,722 3,722 3,722 161 14% 11% 11% 11% 11% 10% 10% 9% 9%

988 3,014 5,205 6,887 6,946 6,950 6,950 6,950 6,950 164 19% 18% 20% 21% 20% 19% 18% 18% 17%

15 88 131 144 148 148 148 148 148 208 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

2 10 15 17 17 17 17 17 17 297 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

3 14 20 22 22 22 22 22 22 298 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

58 222 365 410 414 414 414 414 414 315 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

157 863 1,320 1,461 1,492 1,495 1,495 1,495 1,495 389 3% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4%

1,219 2,554 4,312 5,266 5,872 6,515 7,164 7,814 8,451 467 23% 16% 16% 16% 17% 18% 19% 20% 21%

129 515 796 881 885 886 886 886 886 468 2% 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2%

4 27 40 44 44 44 44 44 44 492 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

94 202 242 255 256 256 256 256 256 551 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

142 983 1,595 1,847 1,852 1,853 1,853 1,853 1,853 645 3% 6% 6% 6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 1)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J1. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 1)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J2. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 2)

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 3)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J3. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 3)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J4. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 4)

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 5)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J5. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 5)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good (Scenario 6)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J6. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 6)

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J7. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Rain (Scenario 7)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Midday, Snow (Scenario 8)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J8. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Midday, Snow (Scenario 8)

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good (Scenario 9)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J9. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather (Scenario 9)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 10)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J10. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Rain (Scenario 10)

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Weekend, Midday, Snow (Scenario 11)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J11. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Weekend, Midday, Snow (Scenario 11)

ETE and Trip Generation Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good (Scenario 12)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J12. ETE and Trip Generation: Winter, Midweek, Weekend, Evening, Good Weather (Scenario 12)

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good, Airshow (Scenario 13)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J13. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Weekend, Midday, Good Weather, Airshow (Scenario 13)

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good, New Plant (Scenario 14)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J14. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, New Plant (Scenario 14)

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

ETE and Trip Generation Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good, Roadway Impact (Scenario 15)

Trip Generation ETE 100%

Percent of Total Vehicles 80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 540 570 600 Elapsed Time (min)

Figure J15. ETE and Trip Generation: Summer, Midweek, Midday, Good Weather, Roadway Impact Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant J15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

APPENDIX K Evacuation Roadway Network

K. EVACUATION ROADWAY NETWORK As discussed in Section 1.3, a linknode analysis network was constructed to model the roadway network within the study area. Figure K1 provides an overview of the linknode analysis network. The figure has been divided up into 53 more detailed figures (Figure K2 through Figure K54) which show each of the links and nodes in the network.

The analysis network was calibrated using the observations made during the field survey conducted in March 2012. Table K1 lists the characteristics of each roadway section modeled in the ETE analysis. Each link is identified by its road name and the upstream and downstream node numbers. The geographic location of each link can be observed by referencing the grid map number provided in Table K1. The roadway type identified in Table K1 is generally based on the following criteria:

Minor arterial: 2 or more lanes in each direction Collector: single lane in each direction Local roadways: single lane in each direction, local roads with low free flow speeds The term, No. of Lanes in Table K1 identifies the number of lanes that extend throughout the length of the link. Many links have additional lanes on the immediate approach to an intersection (turn pockets); these have been recorded and entered into the input stream for the DYNEV II System.

As discussed in Section 1.3, lane width and shoulder width were not physically measured during the road survey. Rather, estimates of these measures were based on visual observations and recorded images.

Table K2 identifies each node in the network that is controlled and the type of control (stop sign, yield sign, pretimed signal, actuated signal, traffic control point) at that node.

Uncontrolled nodes are not included in Table K2. The location of each node can be observed by referencing the grid map number provided.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K1. CCNPP LinkNode Analysis Network Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K2. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 1 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K3. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 2 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K4. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 3 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K5. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 4 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K6. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 5 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K7. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 6 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K8. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 7 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K9. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 8 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K10. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 9 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K11. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 10 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K12. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 11 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K13. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 12 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K14. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 13 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K15. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 14 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K16. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 15 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K17. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 16 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K18. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 17 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K19. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 18 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K20 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K20. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 19 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K21 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K21. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 20 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K22 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K22. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 21 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K23 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K23. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 22 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K24 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K24. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 23 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K25 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K25. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 24 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K26 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K26. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 25 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K27 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K27. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 26 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K28 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K28. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 27 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K29 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K29. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 28 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K30 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K30. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 29 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K31 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K31. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 30 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K32 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K32. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 31 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K33 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K33. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 32 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K34 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K34. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 33 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K35 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K35. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 34 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K36 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K36. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 35 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K37 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K37. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 36 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K38 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K38. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 37 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K39 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K39. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 38 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K40 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K40. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 39 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K41 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K41. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 40 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K42 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K42. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 41 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K43 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K43. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 42 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K44 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K44. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 43 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K45 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K45. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 44 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K46 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K46. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 45 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K47 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K47. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 46 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K48 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K48. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 47 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K49 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K49. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 48 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K50 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K50. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 49 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K51 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K51. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 50 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K52 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K52. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 51 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K53 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K53. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 52 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K54 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Figure K54. LinkNode Analysis Network - Grid 53 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K55 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table K1. Evacuation Roadway Network Characteristics Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number MINOR 1 1 103 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1369 1 12 0 1700 55 2 MINOR 2 1 504 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 867 2 12 8 1900 60 2 3 1 507 MD 4 COLLECTOR 1241 2 12 8 1900 55 2 4 2 56 MD 235 COLLECTOR 807 3 10 0 1900 50 50 MINOR 5 2 57 MD 246 ARTERIAL 821 2 12 0 1750 40 50 MINOR 6 3 336 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 612 3 12 8 1900 65 24 MINOR 7 3 337 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1032 3 12 8 1900 70 24 MINOR 8 4 165 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 2745 2 12 8 1750 70 24 MINOR 9 4 544 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 985 3 12 8 1900 70 24 MINOR 10 5 6 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 6571 2 12 8 1900 65 31 MINOR 11 5 167 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 3009 2 12 8 1900 70 24 MINOR 12 6 5 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 6571 2 12 8 1900 65 31 MINOR 13 6 7 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 2439 2 12 8 1750 65 31 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K56 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number MINOR 14 7 6 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 2439 2 12 8 1900 65 31 MINOR 15 7 8 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 5691 2 12 8 1900 65 31 MINOR 16 8 7 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 5691 2 12 8 1750 65 31 MINOR 17 8 491 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 923 3 12 8 1900 65 33 MINOR 18 9 486 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1499 2 12 8 1900 65 33 MINOR 19 9 492 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 494 2 12 8 1900 65 33 MINOR 20 10 196 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 756 2 12 8 1900 65 33 MINOR 21 10 487 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 4431 2 12 8 1900 65 33 MINOR 22 11 12 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1493 1 12 0 1700 60 44 MINOR 23 11 203 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1536 1 12 0 1750 70 44 MINOR 24 12 11 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1493 1 12 0 1700 70 44 25 12 13 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 4749 1 12 2 1700 50 44 26 13 12 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 4749 1 12 2 1700 60 44 27 13 224 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2880 1 12 8 1700 55 43 28 14 15 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 4742 1 12 8 1700 55 43 29 14 224 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 3311 1 12 8 1700 55 43 30 15 14 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 4742 1 12 8 1700 55 43 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K57 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number 31 15 578 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2447 2 12 8 1900 55 43 32 16 45 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1844 3 10 0 1750 50 45 33 16 67 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 1500 2 12 0 1750 50 45 MINOR 34 16 68 MD 235 ARTERIAL 339 3 10 0 1900 55 43 35 16 578 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 593 2 12 8 1900 55 43 MINOR 36 17 158 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 2913 2 12 8 1900 70 21 MINOR 37 17 159 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1974 2 12 8 1900 70 24 38 18 158 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2176 2 12 8 1900 65 21 MINOR 39 18 384 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 4554 2 12 8 1900 65 21 MINOR 40 19 384 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 3884 2 12 8 1900 65 21 MINOR 41 19 505 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 772 2 12 8 1900 65 21 MINOR 42 20 335 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 3217 2 12 8 1900 65 15 MINOR 43 20 338 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 4286 2 12 8 1900 65 15 MINOR 44 21 335 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 2357 2 12 8 1900 65 14 MINOR 45 21 339 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 3056 2 12 4 1900 65 14 MINOR 46 22 21 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1908 2 12 4 1900 70 14 47 22 339 MD 2/4 FREEWAY RAMP 1153 1 12 4 1700 45 14 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K58 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number MINOR 48 23 22 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 8375 2 12 4 1750 70 14 MINOR 49 23 25 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 4271 3 12 8 1900 65 14 50 24 92 MD 231 COLLECTOR 2628 1 12 4 1700 50 11 MINOR 51 24 340 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1678 3 12 4 1750 65 11 MINOR 52 24 502 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1617 3 12 4 1900 50 11 53 24 503 CHURCH ST UNDEFINED 850 2 12 4 1900 30 11 MINOR 54 25 23 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 4271 2 12 8 1900 65 14 MINOR 55 25 554 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 3994 2 12 8 1900 65 11 56 25 569 MAIN ST COLLECTOR 4444 1 10 0 1700 45 11 MINOR 57 26 342 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1125 3 12 0 1750 55 11 MINOR 58 26 502 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 960 2 12 0 1900 50 11 59 27 28 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2153 2 12 8 1750 55 5 60 27 441 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 1749 2 12 8 1900 55 5 61 28 27 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2153 2 12 8 1900 55 5 62 28 38 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 1888 2 12 8 1750 55 11 63 29 115 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2125 2 12 8 1900 55 5 64 29 441 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 5660 2 12 8 1900 55 5 HUNTING CREEK 65 30 31 RD COLLECTOR 4987 1 10 0 1700 40 4 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K59 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number HUNTING CREEK 66 31 32 RD COLLECTOR 9103 1 10 0 1700 40 4 67 31 117 LOWARY RD COLLECTOR 867 1 10 0 1700 40 4 HUNTINGTOWN 68 32 118 RD COLLECTOR 3182 1 10 0 1750 45 5 69 33 34 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 5120 2 12 8 1750 55 5 70 33 118 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 1045 2 12 8 1750 55 5 71 34 33 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 5120 2 12 8 1900 55 5 72 34 504 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 10368 2 12 8 1900 55 2 73 35 29 MD 263 COLLECTOR 1002 1 11 6 1750 45 5 LOCAL 74 36 28 HOSPITAL RD ROADWAY 1498 1 12 0 1750 30 5 75 37 499 STOAKLEY RD COLLECTOR 1993 1 10 0 1700 45 5 76 38 28 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 1888 2 12 8 1750 55 11 MINOR 77 38 39 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1482 2 12 8 1750 55 11 MINOR 78 39 38 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1482 2 12 8 1750 55 11 MINOR 79 39 342 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1586 2 12 8 1750 55 11 80 43 508 MD 402 COLLECTOR 2211 1 12 4 1700 50 11 81 45 16 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1844 3 10 0 1750 55 45 82 45 46 MD 235 COLLECTOR 2236 3 10 0 1750 55 45 83 46 45 MD 235 COLLECTOR 2236 3 10 0 1750 55 45 84 46 47 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1631 3 10 0 1750 55 45 85 47 46 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1631 3 10 0 1750 55 45 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K60 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number 86 47 48 MD 235 COLLECTOR 928 3 10 0 1750 55 45 87 48 47 MD 235 COLLECTOR 928 3 10 0 1750 55 45 88 48 231 MD 235 COLLECTOR 587 3 10 0 1750 55 45 89 49 50 MD 235 COLLECTOR 2779 3 10 0 1750 55 45 90 49 231 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1583 3 10 0 1750 55 45 91 49 233 MD 237 COLLECTOR 1023 2 10 4 1900 50 45 92 50 49 MD 235 COLLECTOR 2779 4 10 0 1750 55 45 93 50 242 MD 235 COLLECTOR 2089 3 10 0 1900 55 45 94 51 53 MD 235 COLLECTOR 818 3 10 0 1900 55 46 95 51 248 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1159 3 10 0 1900 55 46 96 52 53 MD 235 COLLECTOR 678 3 10 0 1900 55 46 97 52 533 MD 235 COLLECTOR 647 3 10 0 1750 55 46 98 53 51 MD 235 COLLECTOR 818 3 10 0 1750 55 46 99 53 52 MD 235 COLLECTOR 678 3 10 0 1750 55 46 100 54 248 MD 235 COLLECTOR 602 3 10 0 1900 50 46 101 54 535 MD 235 COLLECTOR 490 3 10 0 1900 50 46 102 55 56 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1504 3 10 0 1900 50 46 103 55 535 MD 235 COLLECTOR 458 4 10 0 1900 50 46 104 56 2 MD 235 COLLECTOR 807 1 10 0 1750 50 50 105 56 55 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1504 3 10 0 1900 50 46 106 56 57 SHANGRILA DR COLLECTOR 728 2 12 4 1750 35 50 107 57 58 MD 246 COLLECTOR 1173 2 12 0 1750 45 50 108 58 59 MD 246 COLLECTOR 862 2 12 0 1750 45 50 109 59 60 MD 246 COLLECTOR 1064 2 12 0 1750 45 50 110 60 276 MD 246 COLLECTOR 2334 2 12 0 1900 45 50 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K61 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number 111 61 62 MD 246 COLLECTOR 2105 2 12 0 1750 45 49 112 62 63 MD 246 COLLECTOR 854 2 12 0 1750 45 49 113 63 282 MD 246 COLLECTOR 1187 2 12 0 1900 45 49 114 64 65 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 1556 1 12 4 1750 45 49 115 65 288 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 6245 1 12 8 1750 45 49 116 66 297 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 9821 1 11 6 1700 60 41 MINOR 117 67 16 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1500 2 12 0 1750 35 45 118 67 293 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2321 1 12 0 1750 50 45 MINOR 119 68 16 MD 235 ARTERIAL 339 3 10 0 1750 55 43 MINOR 120 68 579 MD 235 ARTERIAL 387 3 10 0 1900 55 43 MINOR 121 69 70 MD 235 ARTERIAL 1905 2 10 0 1750 60 40 MINOR 122 69 579 MD 235 ARTERIAL 2738 2 10 0 1900 55 43 MINOR 123 70 69 MD 235 ARTERIAL 1905 2 10 0 1750 55 40 MINOR 124 70 431 MD 235 ARTERIAL 4199 2 10 0 1900 60 40 125 71 301 MD 245 COLLECTOR 6500 1 12 6 1700 55 29 126 71 309 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1069 2 12 8 1900 55 29 127 71 316 MD 235 COLLECTOR 3266 2 12 8 1750 60 29 128 72 537 MD 245 COLLECTOR 2712 1 10 0 1700 40 29 129 73 74 MD 235 COLLECTOR 3971 2 12 8 1750 60 28 130 73 325 MD 235 COLLECTOR 4170 2 12 8 1900 70 28 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K62 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number 131 74 73 MD 235 COLLECTOR 3971 2 12 8 1750 60 28 MINOR 132 74 328 MD 247 ARTERIAL 11363 1 12 4 1700 50 28 133 74 330 MD 235 COLLECTOR 2200 2 12 8 1900 60 28 134 75 76 MD 235 COLLECTOR 7282 2 12 8 1750 50 19 135 75 330 MD 235 COLLECTOR 11459 2 12 8 1900 60 28 MINOR 136 76 75 MD 235 ARTERIAL 7282 2 12 8 1900 50 19 MINOR 137 76 333 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 10323 2 12 8 1750 55 18 138 77 497 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 4787 1 12 8 1700 60 28 139 78 367 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 3402 1 12 8 1700 45 28 140 80 292 MD 234 COLLECTOR 5858 1 12 4 1700 45 38 141 80 329 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 8491 1 12 8 1700 55 38 142 81 80 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 1682 2 12 0 1900 50 38 143 82 81 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 2346 2 12 0 1750 50 38 144 83 82 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 7238 2 12 0 1750 45 38 145 84 516 MD ROUTE 6 COLLECTOR 12540 1 12 4 1750 45 18 146 85 334 MD ROUTE 6 COLLECTOR 4455 2 12 4 1700 45 18 MINOR 147 85 548 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 1086 2 12 8 1900 55 18 MINOR 148 86 85 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 7812 2 12 8 1750 55 18 MINOR 149 86 87 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 2069 2 12 8 1750 55 9 MINOR 150 87 86 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 2068 2 12 8 1750 55 9 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K63 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number MINOR 151 87 515 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 1155 3 12 8 1900 55 9 MINOR 152 88 354 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 3255 2 12 8 1900 55 9 MINOR 153 88 515 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 1368 2 12 8 1900 55 9 MD ROUTE 5 ON 154 89 349 RAMP FREEWAY RAMP 1027 1 12 4 1700 40 9 155 89 514 MD 231 COLLECTOR 468 1 12 8 1125 25 9 156 90 135 MD 231 COLLECTOR 5948 1 12 8 1700 50 10 157 90 391 MD 231 COLLECTOR 5569 1 12 4 1750 50 10 158 91 389 MD 508 COLLECTOR 2571 1 12 4 1700 45 10 159 92 24 MD 231 COLLECTOR 2628 1 12 4 1750 50 11 160 92 390 MD 231 COLLECTOR 3519 1 12 4 1750 50 11 MINOR 161 93 94 MD 2 ARTERIAL 3310 1 12 8 1700 60 2 MINOR 162 93 130 MD 2 ARTERIAL 2000 1 12 8 1750 60 2 MINOR 163 94 93 MD 2 ARTERIAL 3310 1 12 8 1700 60 2 EXIT MINOR LINK 94 8094 MD 2 ARTERIAL 4135 1 12 8 1700 60 2 MINOR 164 95 96 MD 4 ARTERIAL 3767 2 12 8 1900 60 1 MINOR 165 95 102 MD 4 ARTERIAL 5788 2 12 8 1750 55 2 MINOR 166 96 95 MD 4 ARTERIAL 3767 2 12 8 1900 60 1 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K64 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number EXIT MINOR LINK 96 8096 MD 4 ARTERIAL 5240 2 12 8 1900 60 1 167 98 99 MD 262 COLLECTOR 5121 1 12 0 1700 45 1 168 99 100 MD 262 COLLECTOR 5738 1 12 0 1700 45 1 169 100 101 MD 262 COLLECTOR 2039 1 12 0 1700 45 1 170 101 102 MD 262 COLLECTOR 2521 1 12 0 1750 45 2 171 102 1 MD 4 COLLECTOR 826 2 12 8 1750 55 2 MINOR 172 102 507 MD 4 ARTERIAL 416 1 12 8 1700 45 2 MINOR 173 103 1 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1369 1 12 0 1750 55 2 MINOR 174 103 130 MD 2 ARTERIAL 1899 1 12 4 1750 60 2 LOWER LOCAL 175 103 507 MARLBORO RD ROADWAY 1579 1 12 4 1700 40 2 176 105 106 SMOKEY RD COLLECTOR 4769 1 8 0 1700 40 1 MILL BRANCH 177 106 99 RD COLLECTOR 3566 1 10 0 1700 40 1 HUNTINGTOWN 178 107 32 RD COLLECTOR 4093 1 10 0 1700 40 4 HUNTINGTOWN 179 107 108 RD COLLECTOR 6602 1 12 0 1700 40 1 HUNTINGTOWN 180 108 109 RD COLLECTOR 4687 1 12 0 1700 40 1 HUNTINGTOWN 181 109 100 RD COLLECTOR 2088 1 12 0 1700 40 1 KINGS LANDING MINOR 182 110 107 RD ARTERIAL 5922 1 10 0 1700 40 4 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K65 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number HOLLAND CLIFFS 183 111 107 RD COLLECTOR 5119 1 10 0 1700 40 4 184 115 29 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2125 2 12 8 1900 55 5 185 115 119 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 3774 2 12 8 1900 55 5 186 116 117 LOWERY RD COLLECTOR 5535 1 10 0 1700 40 4 187 117 119 LOWARY RD COLLECTOR 5362 1 10 0 1700 40 4 188 118 33 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 1045 2 12 8 1900 55 5 189 118 346 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 3368 2 12 8 1900 55 5 190 119 115 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 3774 2 12 8 1900 55 5 191 119 346 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2474 2 12 8 1900 55 5 LOCAL 192 120 346 ARMIGER RD ROADWAY 2532 1 10 0 1350 30 5 MINOR 193 121 35 MD 263 ARTERIAL 8925 1 12 6 1700 45 5 194 121 347 COX RD COLLECTOR 5671 1 10 0 1700 45 5 MINOR 195 122 121 MD 263 ARTERIAL 6366 1 12 6 1700 45 5 MINOR 196 123 122 MD 263 ARTERIAL 4299 1 12 6 1700 45 5 MINOR 197 123 125 MD 261 ARTERIAL 3348 1 12 0 1700 40 5 198 124 123 MD 263 COLLECTOR 8207 1 10 0 1700 50 5 PONDS WOOD 199 125 128 RD COLLECTOR 5635 1 11 0 1700 50 5 200 125 498 MD 261 COLLECTOR 2760 1 12 0 1700 50 5 PONDS WOOD 201 126 34 RD COLLECTOR 2996 1 11 0 1750 50 5 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K66 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number PONDS WOOD 202 128 126 RD COLLECTOR 9431 1 11 0 1700 50 5 GUY HARDESTY 203 128 129 RD COLLECTOR 11025 1 10 0 1700 40 2 204 129 130 DALRYMPLE RD COLLECTOR 7150 1 10 0 1750 40 2 MINOR 205 130 93 MD 2 ARTERIAL 2000 1 12 8 1700 60 2 MINOR 206 130 103 MD 2 ARTERIAL 1899 1 12 4 1700 55 2 PUSHAW 207 131 93 STATION RD COLLECTOR 3005 1 10 0 1700 40 2 MINOR 208 132 133 MD 261 ARTERIAL 8441 1 12 0 1700 45 2 EXIT LINK 133 8133 MD 261 COLLECTOR 5276 1 12 0 1700 40 2 209 134 37 STOAKLEY RD COLLECTOR 6935 1 10 0 1700 45 10 210 135 90 MD 231 COLLECTOR 5948 1 12 8 1700 50 10 211 135 420 MD 231 COLLECTOR 4368 1 12 8 1700 50 10 212 136 43 MD 402 COLLECTOR 6738 1 12 8 1700 60 12 213 137 438 MD 402 COLLECTOR 5194 1 12 8 1700 60 12 214 138 23 MD 506 COLLECTOR 8091 1 12 4 1700 50 13 PARKERS CREEK 215 139 150 RD COLLECTOR 1867 1 8 0 1700 40 14 PAKERS CREEK 216 140 139 RD COLLECTOR 4919 1 8 0 1700 40 14 SCIENTIST 217 141 139 CLIFFS RD COLLECTOR 4206 1 8 0 1700 40 15 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K67 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number 218 142 560 MD 264 COLLECTOR 3241 1 12 8 1750 55 14 219 143 18 PARRAN RD COLLECTOR 7094 1 8 0 1750 40 23 220 143 562 MD 265 COLLECTOR 5605 1 12 0 1700 55 21 221 144 567 MD 264 COLLECTOR 4426 1 12 8 1700 50 20 222 146 563 MD 265 COLLECTOR 5234 1 12 0 1700 55 30 223 147 19 BALL RD COLLECTOR 4633 1 10 8 1750 40 21 224 148 26 MAIN ST COLLECTOR 1463 1 10 0 1700 45 11 225 148 503 CHURCH ST COLLECTOR 801 1 10 0 1700 40 11 226 149 148 MAIN ST COLLECTOR 2154 1 10 0 1700 45 11 227 149 340 OLD FIELD LN COLLECTOR 1478 1 10 0 1750 35 11 PARKERS CREEK 228 150 21 RD COLLECTOR 632 1 12 4 1700 40 14 MD 2/4 ON 229 150 339 RAMP FREEWAY RAMP 3425 1 12 4 1700 45 14 230 151 150 MD 765 COLLECTOR 2437 1 12 8 1700 50 15 231 151 335 MD 509 COLLECTOR 597 1 10 8 1700 45 15 WESTERN 232 152 20 SHORES BLVD COLLECTOR 651 1 12 0 1700 40 15 233 152 494 MD 765 COLLECTOR 2937 1 12 8 1700 60 15 234 153 495 MD 765 COLLECTOR 1716 1 12 4 1575 35 21 CALVERT BEACH 235 153 506 RD COLLECTOR 1751 1 8 0 1700 45 21 236 154 494 MD 509 COLLECTOR 3621 1 10 2 1700 45 15 WESTERN 237 155 152 SHORES BLVD COLLECTOR 2755 1 12 0 1700 40 15 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K68 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number CALVERT BEACH 238 156 500 RD COLLECTOR 1612 1 8 0 1575 35 21 239 157 501 MD 765 COLLECTOR 4927 1 12 8 1700 50 21 MINOR 240 158 17 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 2913 2 12 8 1900 70 21 241 158 18 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2176 2 12 8 1750 65 21 242 158 157 MD 765 COLLECTOR 5140 1 12 4 1700 60 21 MINOR 243 159 3 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 3744 2 12 4 1900 70 24 MINOR 244 159 17 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1974 2 12 8 1900 70 24 CALVERT CLIFFS 245 161 3 PKWY COLLECTOR 4030 1 12 2 1750 50 24 246 162 163 SAW MILL RD COLLECTOR 1746 1 12 4 1700 50 24 247 163 159 SAW MILL RD COLLECTOR 478 1 12 8 1700 50 24 FLAG PONDS LOCAL 248 164 159 PKWY ROADWAY 3111 1 8 0 1350 30 24 MINOR 249 165 4 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 2745 2 12 8 1900 70 24 MINOR 250 165 167 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1020 2 12 8 1900 70 24 251 166 165 NURSERY RD COLLECTOR 2711 2 10 6 1750 40 24 MINOR 252 167 5 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 3009 2 12 8 1900 70 24 MINOR 253 167 165 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1020 2 12 8 1750 70 24 WHITE SANDS 254 169 4 DR COLLECTOR 2427 2 12 0 1750 45 24 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K69 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number 255 171 5 MD 765 COLLECTOR 1206 1 10 6 1700 55 31 SOLLERS WHARF 256 173 171 RD COLLECTOR 5172 1 10 0 1700 40 31 MINOR 257 174 7 MD 497 ARTERIAL 1569 1 12 0 1750 40 34 258 174 178 MD 765 COLLECTOR 1807 1 10 6 1700 55 34 259 174 543 MD 765 COLLECTOR 2824 1 10 6 1700 40 34 260 175 5 MD 765 COLLECTOR 2248 1 10 6 1700 55 31 LOCAL 261 175 542 MD 765 ROADWAY 2803 1 12 0 1700 55 31 MINOR 262 176 8 MD 760 ARTERIAL 1223 1 12 4 1750 40 33 263 176 184 MD 760 COLLECTOR 6544 1 12 2 1700 50 34 264 176 490 MD 765 COLLECTOR 1953 1 10 8 1700 60 33 265 177 187 MD 765 COLLECTOR 505 1 12 0 1750 45 34 266 178 177 MD 765 COLLECTOR 2851 1 10 6 1700 55 34 267 179 174 MD 497 COLLECTOR 5949 1 12 0 1750 50 34 THUNDERBIRD 268 180 188 DR COLLECTOR 514 1 10 0 1700 45 34 269 182 183 MD 760 COLLECTOR 5004 1 12 4 1700 50 47 270 183 193 MD 760 COLLECTOR 1958 1 12 2 1700 50 34 271 184 176 MD 760 COLLECTOR 6546 1 12 2 1750 50 34 SOUTHERN CONNECTOR MINOR 272 184 481 BLVD ARTERIAL 148 1 12 4 1700 50 34 273 185 551 OLIVERT RD COLLECTOR 4630 1 12 4 1700 50 33 274 187 493 MD 765 COLLECTOR 1641 1 12 0 1700 40 33 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K70 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number TOWN SQUARE 275 188 187 DR COLLECTOR 701 1 10 0 1750 45 34 THUNDERBIRD 276 189 188 DR COLLECTOR 377 1 10 0 1700 45 34 LITTLE COVE 277 191 179 POINT RD COLLECTOR 4463 1 10 0 1700 40 34 278 192 179 MD 497 COLLECTOR 5890 1 12 0 1700 50 34 279 193 550 MD 760 COLLECTOR 2681 1 12 2 1700 40 34 LOCAL 280 194 193 COYOTE TRAIL ROADWAY 1958 1 8 0 1350 30 34 281 195 202 MD 765 COLLECTOR 1586 1 10 2 1700 40 33 MINOR 282 196 10 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 756 2 12 8 1900 65 33 MINOR 283 196 198 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 894 2 12 8 1750 70 33 MINOR 284 197 198 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1191 2 12 8 1750 70 33 285 197 568 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2109 2 12 8 1900 70 33 MINOR 286 198 196 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 894 2 12 8 1900 70 33 MINOR 287 198 197 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1191 2 12 8 1900 70 33 SOLOMONS 288 199 200 ISLAND RD COLLECTOR 3569 1 12 10 1700 45 44 327 231 49 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1583 3 10 0 1750 55 45 328 232 231 CHESTNUT RD COLLECTOR 827 2 10 0 1750 40 45 329 233 234 MD 237 COLLECTOR 4010 1 10 4 1700 50 45 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K71 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number 330 234 237 MD 237 COLLECTOR 5709 1 10 4 1700 50 45 331 235 62 MD 237 COLLECTOR 1344 1 10 4 1750 50 49 332 236 235 MD 237 COLLECTOR 1765 1 10 4 1700 50 49 333 237 236 MD 237 COLLECTOR 1718 1 10 4 1700 50 49 334 238 49 MAPLE RD COLLECTOR 1237 1 12 4 1750 40 45 MACARTHUR 335 239 50 BLVD COLLECTOR 744 2 10 0 1750 40 45 LOCAL 380 280 62 INDIAN WAY ROADWAY 249 1 12 0 1750 30 49 TRI COMMUNITY LOCAL 381 281 63 WAY ROADWAY 343 1 12 0 1750 30 49 382 282 64 MD 246 COLLECTOR 3009 2 12 0 1750 45 49 LOCAL 383 283 282 CAREFREE WAY ROADWAY 756 1 10 0 1350 30 49 384 284 285 BAY RIDGE RD COLLECTOR 779 1 12 0 1700 40 49 385 285 64 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 1247 1 12 4 1750 45 49 386 286 65 MD 471 COLLECTOR 3405 1 12 0 1750 40 49 387 287 65 MD 471 COLLECTOR 3981 1 8 0 1750 40 49 388 288 289 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 7718 1 12 8 1700 45 48 MINOR 389 288 366 MD 249 ARTERIAL 8287 1 12 8 1700 50 51 390 289 290 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 14692 1 12 6 1700 50 48 391 290 291 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 13229 1 12 6 1750 50 41 392 291 496 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 1887 2 12 8 1700 45 38 EXIT LINK 292 8292 MD 234 COLLECTOR 5924 1 12 4 1700 45 38 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K72 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number LOCAL 393 293 67 MD 2/4 ROADWAY 2320 1 12 0 1750 35 45 394 293 539 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 4153 1 11 6 1700 60 42 WILDEWOOD LOCAL 395 294 293 PKWY ROADWAY 2539 1 12 6 1750 35 42 WILDEWOOD LOCAL 396 295 69 BLVD ROADWAY 1838 1 12 6 1575 35 40 WILDEWOOD LOCAL 397 295 294 PKWY ROADWAY 2219 1 12 6 1575 35 42 MINOR 398 296 66 MD 471 ARTERIAL 4136 1 8 0 1575 35 42 399 297 291 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 8178 1 11 6 1750 60 41 WASHINGTON 400 298 83 ST COLLECTOR 2115 1 12 0 1750 45 38 401 299 83 MD 245 COLLECTOR 9194 1 12 6 1750 45 38 402 300 299 MD 245 COLLECTOR 4322 1 12 6 1700 55 39 403 301 300 MD 245 COLLECTOR 7795 1 12 6 1750 55 39 404 302 299 MCINTOSH RD COLLECTOR 7127 1 12 4 1700 40 38 HICKORY HILL 405 303 300 RD COLLECTOR 2234 1 12 4 1750 40 39 406 304 70 AIRPORT RD COLLECTOR 1441 1 12 0 1750 35 40 MERVEL DEAN 407 305 538 RD COLLECTOR 1632 1 10 6 1575 35 40 408 306 305 CLARKS MILL RD COLLECTOR 2234 1 10 0 1575 35 40 MERVEL DEAN 409 307 310 RD COLLECTOR 4250 1 10 6 1750 35 40 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K73 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number MEDIAN LOCAL 410 307 573 CROSSING ROADWAY 354 1 12 4 1750 20 40 CLARKES 411 308 307 LANDING RD COLLECTOR 2457 1 10 4 1750 35 40 412 309 71 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1069 2 12 8 1750 55 29 413 309 312 MD 235 COLLECTOR 4355 2 10 0 1900 60 40 MERVEL DEAN 414 310 475 RD COLLECTOR 4245 1 10 6 1700 40 40 MINOR 415 311 310 JOY CHAPEL RD ARTERIAL 2330 1 8 4 1750 40 40 416 312 309 MD 235 COLLECTOR 4355 2 10 0 1900 60 40 417 312 573 MD 235 COLLECTOR 5337 2 10 0 1750 60 40 418 313 312 ST JOHNS RD COLLECTOR 1688 1 10 2 1700 40 40 419 314 313 ST JOHNS RD COLLECTOR 1371 1 10 2 1700 40 40 420 315 536 MD 245 COLLECTOR 2177 1 10 0 1700 40 29 MINOR 421 316 71 MD 235 ARTERIAL 3266 2 12 8 1750 60 29 422 316 318 MD 235 COLLECTOR 6036 2 12 8 1750 60 29 423 317 316 VISTA RD COLLECTOR 5676 1 8 0 1750 40 29 424 318 316 MD 235 COLLECTOR 6036 2 12 8 1750 60 29 425 318 319 MD 235 COLLECTOR 6664 2 12 8 1750 70 29 426 319 318 MD 235 COLLECTOR 6664 2 12 8 1750 70 29 427 319 322 CLOVER HILL RD COLLECTOR 3052 1 12 4 1700 40 29 428 319 570 MD 235 COLLECTOR 4450 2 12 8 1900 70 29 MINOR 429 320 73 MD 472 ARTERIAL 5458 1 8 2 1750 50 28 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K74 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number S SANDGATES 430 321 319 RD COLLECTOR 3048 1 12 0 1750 40 29 431 322 571 MCINTOSH RD COLLECTOR 4362 1 12 4 1700 40 29 432 323 302 MCINTOSH RD COLLECTOR 6190 1 12 4 1700 40 28 JONES WHARF 433 324 318 RD COLLECTOR 4683 1 12 0 1750 40 29 434 325 73 MD 235 COLLECTOR 4170 2 12 8 1750 60 28 FRIENDSHIP 435 325 327 SCHOOL RD COLLECTOR 8911 1 10 0 1700 40 28 436 325 570 MD 235 COLLECTOR 2314 2 12 8 1750 70 28 437 327 328 BISHOP RD COLLECTOR 10051 1 10 0 1700 40 28 438 328 77 MD 247 COLLECTOR 3592 1 11 8 1700 50 28 BUSY CORNER 439 328 497 RD COLLECTOR 4360 1 12 0 1700 40 28 440 329 77 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 10691 1 12 8 1700 55 28 441 330 74 MD 235 COLLECTOR 2200 2 12 8 1750 60 28 442 330 75 MD 235 COLLECTOR 11459 2 12 8 1900 60 28 LOCAL 443 331 74 OAKVILLE RD ROADWAY 1258 1 12 4 1750 30 28 444 331 330 OAKVILLE RD COLLECTOR 1376 1 10 0 1700 40 28 445 332 84 MD ROUTE 6 COLLECTOR 7722 1 12 4 1700 45 18 MINOR 446 333 76 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 10323 2 12 8 1750 55 18 MINOR 447 333 545 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 7739 2 12 4 1900 50 18 EXIT LINK 334 8334 MD ROUTE 6 COLLECTOR 3823 1 12 4 1700 45 18 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K75 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number MINOR 448 335 20 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 3217 2 12 8 1900 65 15 MINOR 449 335 21 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 2357 2 12 8 1900 65 14 MINOR 450 336 159 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 3138 2 12 8 1900 65 24 MINOR 451 337 4 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 2014 2 12 8 1750 70 24 MINOR 452 338 20 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 4286 2 12 8 1900 65 15 MINOR 453 338 505 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 3065 2 12 8 1900 65 21 MINOR 454 339 436 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 2187 2 12 4 1900 70 14 MINOR 455 340 24 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1678 3 12 4 1750 50 11 MINOR 456 340 554 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 2386 2 12 8 1900 65 11 457 341 91 MD 508 COLLECTOR 6104 1 10 0 1750 40 10 MINOR 458 342 26 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1125 2 12 0 1900 50 11 MINOR 459 342 39 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1586 2 12 8 1750 55 11 460 343 39 FOX RUN BLVD COLLECTOR 1302 1 10 0 1750 45 11 PRINCE FREDERICK LOCAL 461 344 38 BLVD ROADWAY 849 1 12 0 1750 30 11 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K76 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number CALVERTON LOCAL 462 345 115 SCHOOL RD ROADWAY 1233 1 12 0 1350 30 5 463 346 118 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 3368 2 12 8 1750 55 5 464 346 119 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2474 2 12 8 1900 55 5 465 347 118 COX RD COLLECTOR 5443 1 12 4 1750 45 5 EXIT LINK 348 8348 MD 381 COLLECTOR 4440 1 11 10 1700 40 3 MINOR 466 349 351 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 1000 2 12 4 1900 60 9 467 349 352 MD ROUTE COLLECTOR 657 3 12 8 1900 55 9 468 350 353 MD 231 COLLECTOR 581 1 10 6 1700 50 9 MINOR 469 351 349 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 1000 2 12 4 1900 60 9 MINOR 470 351 510 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 2026 2 12 8 1900 60 9 471 352 349 MD ROUTE COLLECTOR 657 2 12 8 1900 60 9 EXIT LINK 352 8352 MD ROUTE COLLECTOR 1343 2 12 8 1900 60 9 EXIT LINK 353 8353 MD 231 COLLECTOR 1832 1 10 6 1700 50 9 MINOR 472 354 88 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 3255 2 12 8 1750 55 9 MINOR 473 354 510 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 4069 2 12 8 1900 60 9 474 355 88 MOHAWK DR COLLECTOR 1296 1 8 0 1750 30 9 475 356 87 OAKS RD COLLECTOR 1500 1 10 0 1750 40 9 476 357 87 MT WOFL RD COLLECTOR 1435 1 10 0 1750 40 9 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K77 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number GOLDEN BEACH 477 358 86 RD COLLECTOR 678 1 10 0 1750 40 9 GOLDEN BEACH 478 359 86 RD COLLECTOR 1180 1 12 6 1750 50 9 GOLDEN BEACH 479 360 359 RD COLLECTOR 3658 1 12 6 1700 50 9 GOLDEN BEACH 480 361 360 RD COLLECTOR 7323 1 12 6 1700 50 9 MECHANICSVILL 481 362 333 E RD COLLECTOR 1558 1 12 0 1750 40 18 482 363 76 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 4620 1 12 8 1750 55 18 483 364 75 MD ROUTE 6 COLLECTOR 3455 1 10 0 1700 50 19 484 365 331 QUEENTREE RD COLLECTOR 5079 1 10 0 1700 40 28 485 366 288 MD 249 COLLECTOR 8287 1 12 4 1750 30 51 MILLSTONE MINOR 336 240 50 LANDING RD ARTERIAL 2250 1 12 6 1750 40 45 MILLSTONE MINOR 337 241 240 LANDING RD ARTERIAL 2255 1 12 6 1700 40 46 338 242 50 MD 235 COLLECTOR 2089 3 10 0 1750 55 45 339 242 244 MD 235 COLLECTOR 518 3 10 0 1900 55 46 RUE PURCHASE LOCAL 340 243 242 RD ROADWAY 2142 1 10 0 1350 30 46 341 244 242 MD 235 COLLECTOR 518 3 10 0 1900 55 46 342 244 533 MD 235 COLLECTOR 3024 3 10 0 1750 55 46 BUCK HEWITT 343 245 244 RD COLLECTOR 829 1 10 0 1700 40 46 344 246 51 PEGG RD COLLECTOR 1727 2 12 0 1750 45 46 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K78 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number 345 247 51 BUSE RD COLLECTOR 664 2 10 4 1900 40 46 346 248 51 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1159 3 10 0 1750 55 46 347 248 54 MD 235 COLLECTOR 602 3 10 0 1750 50 46 348 249 248 VALLEY DR COLLECTOR 900 1 12 0 1700 40 46 HERMANVILLE 349 250 264 RD COLLECTOR 3301 1 12 4 1700 40 53 350 250 519 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1130 3 10 0 1900 60 53 MINOR 351 252 257 MD 235 ARTERIAL 3489 1 12 10 1700 60 53 LOCAL 352 253 252 TIPPETT RD ROADWAY 1272 1 10 4 1350 35 53 353 254 255 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 4499 1 12 8 1700 50 53 354 255 256 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 4099 1 12 8 1700 50 53 355 256 258 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 6527 1 12 8 1700 50 52 356 257 256 MD 489 COLLECTOR 6105 1 10 0 1700 40 53 MINOR 357 257 261 MD 235 ARTERIAL 6443 1 12 10 1700 60 53 358 258 270 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 2136 1 12 8 1700 60 52 359 259 260 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 3359 1 12 8 1700 60 52 360 260 285 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 3972 1 12 8 1700 60 49 MINOR 361 261 250 MD 235 ARTERIAL 5258 2 12 10 1750 60 53 362 262 250 SHAW RD COLLECTOR 2053 1 12 4 1750 40 53 HERMANVILLE 363 263 258 RD COLLECTOR 4099 1 12 4 1700 40 52 HERMANVILLE 364 264 263 RD COLLECTOR 5598 1 12 4 1700 40 50 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K79 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number 365 265 520 MD 235 COLLECTOR 5807 2 10 0 1900 50 50 LOCAL 366 266 265 LINCOLN AVE ROADWAY 1272 1 12 0 1350 30 53 CEDAR POINT LOCAL 367 267 2 RD ROADWAY 564 2 12 0 1750 30 50 LOCAL 368 268 267 CUDDIHY RD ROADWAY 1797 1 12 0 1350 30 50 CEDAR POINT LOCAL 369 269 267 RD ROADWAY 872 2 12 0 1350 30 46 370 270 259 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 3444 1 12 8 1700 60 52 371 271 270 WILLOWS RD COLLECTOR 3129 1 10 8 1700 40 52 372 272 271 WILLOWS RD COLLECTOR 4082 1 10 8 1700 40 50 373 273 57 WILLOWS RD COLLECTOR 1843 1 10 8 1750 40 50 374 274 58 MIDWAY DR COLLECTOR 1315 1 8 8 1750 35 50 375 275 60 SARATOGA DR COLLECTOR 510 1 12 0 1750 40 50 376 276 278 MD 246 COLLECTOR 833 2 12 0 1900 45 50 377 277 276 PACIFIC DR COLLECTOR 949 1 16 0 1700 40 50 378 278 61 MD 246 COLLECTOR 2840 2 12 0 1900 45 50 WEST BURY 379 279 61 BLVD W COLLECTOR 1968 1 12 4 1700 40 49 EXIT LINK 366 8366 MD 249 COLLECTOR 7279 1 12 4 1700 50 51 EXIT LINK 367 8367 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 2514 1 12 8 1575 35 28 FD ROOSEVELT 486 368 67 BLVD COLLECTOR 595 1 10 0 1750 40 45 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K80 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number LOCAL 487 369 47 MIRAMAR WAY ROADWAY 217 3 10 0 1750 30 45 LOCAL 488 370 52 EXPEDITION DR ROADWAY 570 1 10 0 1750 30 46 LOCAL 489 371 53 JOE THOMAS LN ROADWAY 306 3 10 0 1900 30 46 LOCAL 490 372 54 CORPORATE DR ROADWAY 817 2 12 0 1750 30 46 491 373 55 FDR BLVD COLLECTOR 208 2 12 4 1750 40 46 LOCAL 492 374 375 MD 343 ROADWAY 9543 1 12 2 1350 30 7 EXIT LOCAL LINK 375 8375 MD 343 ROADWAY 9027 1 12 2 1350 30 8 CALVERT BEACH 493 376 156 RD COLLECTOR 2219 1 8 0 1700 45 21 CALVERT BEACH MINOR 494 377 376 RD ARTERIAL 3117 1 8 0 1700 45 21 495 378 156 LONG BEACH RD COLLECTOR 4691 1 8 0 1700 45 21 496 379 566 MD 264 COLLECTOR 1140 1 12 8 1700 55 20 497 380 561 MD 264 COLLECTOR 4284 1 12 8 1700 50 20 498 381 382 MD 264 COLLECTOR 2349 1 9 0 1700 40 20 499 382 144 MD 264 COLLECTOR 7421 1 12 8 1700 50 20 500 383 338 LANCASTER DR COLLECTOR 563 1 10 0 1575 35 21 MINOR 501 384 18 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 4554 2 12 8 1750 65 21 MINOR 502 384 19 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 3884 2 12 8 1750 65 21 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K81 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number SOLOMONS LOCAL 503 385 384 ISLAND RD ROADWAY 885 1 8 0 1350 30 21 LOCAL 504 386 91 SIXES RD ROADWAY 1424 1 12 0 1750 30 10 LOCAL 505 387 91 MD 506 ROADWAY 1342 1 12 0 1750 30 10 506 388 341 MD 508 COLLECTOR 2575 1 10 0 1700 40 20 507 389 90 MD 508 COLLECTOR 3350 1 12 4 1700 45 10 508 390 92 MD 231 COLLECTOR 3519 1 12 4 1700 50 11 509 390 391 MD 231 COLLECTOR 3301 1 12 4 1750 50 11 510 391 90 MD 231 COLLECTOR 5569 1 12 4 1700 50 10 511 391 390 MD 231 COLLECTOR 3301 1 12 4 1750 50 11 SOLLERS WHARF 512 400 173 RD COLLECTOR 4908 1 10 0 1700 40 31 513 401 541 MILL BRIDGE RD COLLECTOR 3933 1 12 10 1700 50 33 514 402 205 COASTER RD COLLECTOR 1472 1 12 10 1700 45 33 PATUXENT LOCAL 515 405 198 POINT PKWY ROADWAY 663 1 10 0 1750 30 33 MINOR 516 406 197 PATUXENT DR ARTERIAL 489 1 10 0 1350 30 33 517 407 182 MD 760 COLLECTOR 2447 1 12 2 1700 50 47 LITTLE COVE 518 409 191 POINT RD COLLECTOR 2699 1 10 0 1700 40 34 MINOR 519 410 320 MD 472 ARTERIAL 3244 1 8 2 1700 50 28 289 200 201 MD 765 COLLECTOR 3236 1 10 1 1700 45 44 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K82 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number LOCAL 290 200 558 956 ROADWAY 516 1 12 4 1350 30 44 MINOR 291 201 202 MD 765 ARTERIAL 1160 1 12 4 1700 40 33 PATUXENT 292 202 198 POINT PKWY COLLECTOR 215 2 12 4 1750 40 33 MINOR 293 203 11 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1536 1 12 0 1700 70 44 294 203 568 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 647 1 12 8 1700 70 44 295 204 195 DOWELL RD COLLECTOR 1218 1 8 0 1700 40 33 296 205 9 MILL BRIDGE RD COLLECTOR 276 1 12 10 1750 50 33 LOCAL 297 206 214 MD 336 ROADWAY 9684 1 12 0 1350 30 36 LOCAL 298 206 215 MD 335 ROADWAY 10355 1 12 0 1350 30 36 LOCAL 299 207 206 MD 335 ROADWAY 10459 1 12 4 1350 30 36 LOCAL 300 207 553 SMITHVILLE RD ROADWAY 10053 1 8 0 1350 30 36 LOCAL 301 208 209 SMITHVILLE RD ROADWAY 19420 1 8 0 1750 30 25 MINOR 302 209 210 MD 16 ARTERIAL 10689 1 10 4 1350 30 16 MINOR 303 210 450 MD 16 ARTERIAL 8625 1 10 4 1350 30 17 MINOR 304 211 209 MD 16 ARTERIAL 6914 1 10 4 1750 30 25 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K83 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number LOCAL 305 212 207 MD 335 ROADWAY 8099 1 12 4 1350 30 36 LOCAL 306 213 212 MD 335 ROADWAY 5497 1 10 0 1350 30 35 EXIT LOCAL LINK 214 8214 MD 336 ROADWAY 5772 1 12 0 1350 30 37 EXIT LOCAL LINK 215 8215 MD 335 ROADWAY 6033 1 12 0 1350 30 26 LOCAL 307 216 212 MD 335 ROADWAY 11454 1 10 0 1350 30 36 308 217 220 MD 231 COLLECTOR 4966 1 12 6 1700 50 10 309 217 423 MD 231 COLLECTOR 4652 1 12 6 1700 50 10 310 218 220 MD 231 COLLECTOR 8151 1 12 6 1700 50 9 311 218 221 MD 231 COLLECTOR 4396 1 12 6 1750 50 9 312 220 217 MD 231 COLLECTOR 4966 1 12 6 1700 50 10 313 220 218 MD 231 COLLECTOR 8151 1 12 6 1700 50 9 314 221 218 MD 231 COLLECTOR 4396 1 12 6 1700 50 9 315 221 348 MD 381 COLLECTOR 7343 1 11 10 1700 40 9 316 221 513 MD 231 COLLECTOR 4320 1 12 4 1700 50 9 FIRST COLONY MINOR 317 223 45 BLVD ARTERIAL 1086 3 12 0 1750 40 45 318 224 13 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2880 1 12 8 1700 55 43 319 224 14 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 3311 1 12 8 1700 55 43 N PATUXENT LOCAL 320 225 224 BEACH RD ROADWAY 1189 1 8 0 1350 30 43 321 226 46 SHADY MILE DR COLLECTOR 2175 1 10 0 1750 40 45 322 227 46 OLD ROLLING COLLECTOR 1551 2 12 0 1750 40 45 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K84 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number N TOWN CREEK MINOR 323 228 48 DR ARTERIAL 1368 3 10 4 1750 40 45 N TOWN CREEK MINOR 324 229 228 DR ARTERIAL 2885 1 10 4 1700 40 45 N TOWN CREEK MINOR 325 230 229 DR ARTERIAL 2345 1 10 4 1700 40 43 326 231 48 MD 235 COLLECTOR 587 3 10 0 1750 55 45 ALEXANDRA LOCAL 520 411 325 WAY ROADWAY 2624 1 10 0 1575 35 28 STEER HORN 521 415 72 NECK RD COLLECTOR 5324 1 10 4 1750 40 29 522 420 135 MD 231 COLLECTOR 4368 1 12 8 1700 50 10 523 420 423 MD 231 COLLECTOR 6960 1 10 0 1700 50 10 SEAGULL BEACH MINOR 524 421 420 RD ARTERIAL 1491 1 8 2 1700 40 10 525 422 135 SIXES RD COLLECTOR 1564 1 10 0 1700 40 10 526 423 217 MD 231 COLLECTOR 4652 1 12 6 1700 50 10 527 423 420 MD 231 COLLECTOR 6960 1 10 0 1700 50 10 528 424 423 MILL CREEK RD COLLECTOR 1911 1 10 0 1700 40 10 529 425 135 SKIP JACK RD COLLECTOR 1575 1 12 0 1700 40 10 BLUEBIRD HILL LOCAL 530 426 217 PL ROADWAY 1702 1 8 0 1350 30 10 MORGANZA 531 430 75 TURNER RD COLLECTOR 1623 1 10 3 1700 50 19 MINOR 532 431 70 MD 235 ARTERIAL 4199 2 10 0 1750 60 40 533 431 573 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1228 2 10 0 1750 60 40 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K85 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number AIRPORT VIEW 534 432 431 DR COLLECTOR 1962 1 10 4 1575 35 40 LOCAL 535 433 276 PANTHER DR ROADWAY 789 1 10 0 1350 30 50 LOCAL 536 434 278 SANNERS LN ROADWAY 1042 1 8 0 1350 30 50 537 435 59 S ESSEX DR COLLECTOR 679 1 10 0 1750 40 50 MINOR 538 436 23 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 5028 2 12 4 1900 55 14 WOOD ACRES LOCAL 539 437 436 CT ROADWAY 1446 1 8 0 1350 30 14 540 438 136 MD 402 COLLECTOR 4732 1 12 8 1700 60 12 BREEZY POINT 541 439 498 RD COLLECTOR 1709 1 12 0 1700 45 5 LOCAL 542 440 27 BUCKLER RD ROADWAY 1366 1 12 0 1575 35 5 543 441 27 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 1749 2 12 8 1900 55 5 544 441 29 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 5660 2 12 8 1750 55 5 545 442 441 MF BOWEN RD COLLECTOR 1803 1 10 0 1350 30 5 546 443 92 MASON RD COLLECTOR 1348 1 8 0 1700 40 11 LOCAL 547 444 92 TALE RD ROADWAY 1573 1 10 0 1350 30 11 JW WILLIAMS 548 445 390 RD COLLECTOR 2096 2 12 0 1750 40 11 MINOR 549 446 391 BARSTOW RD ARTERIAL 1500 1 10 0 1750 40 10 GERMAN 550 447 391 CHAPEL RD COLLECTOR 1466 1 10 0 1750 40 11 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K86 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number MINOR 551 450 451 MD 16 ARTERIAL 7862 1 10 4 1350 30 17 EXIT MINOR LINK 451 8451 MD 16 ARTERIAL 7833 1 10 4 1350 30 17 MERVELL DEAN 552 475 309 RD COLLECTOR 1279 1 10 6 1700 40 29 OLD THREE 553 475 480 NOTCH RD COLLECTOR 1946 1 10 0 1750 40 29 554 480 71 SOTTERLY RD COLLECTOR 802 1 10 0 1750 40 29 SOUTHERN CONNECTOR 555 481 482 BLVD COLLECTOR 1018 1 12 6 1700 50 34 SOUTHERN CONNECTOR 556 482 483 BLVD COLLECTOR 1384 1 12 6 1700 50 33 SOUTHERN CONNECTOR 557 483 484 BLVD COLLECTOR 2652 1 12 6 1700 50 33 SOUTHERN CONNECTOR 558 484 540 BLVD COLLECTOR 375 1 12 6 900 20 33 559 485 195 MD 765 COLLECTOR 5681 1 10 6 1700 40 33 SOUTHERN CONNECTOR MINOR 560 485 489 BLVD ARTERIAL 478 1 12 4 1575 35 33 MINOR 561 486 487 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1002 3 12 8 1900 65 33 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K87 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number MINOR 562 486 488 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 373 3 12 8 1900 65 33 MINOR 563 487 10 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 4431 2 12 8 1900 65 33 MINOR 564 487 486 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1002 2 12 8 1750 65 33 565 488 9 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 1127 2 12 8 1900 65 33 SOUTHERN CONNECTOR MINOR 566 489 486 BLVD ARTERIAL 187 1 12 4 1750 40 33 567 490 485 MD 765 COLLECTOR 1890 1 12 4 1700 40 33 MINOR 568 491 9 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1710 2 12 8 1750 65 33 MINOR 569 492 8 MD /24 ARTERIAL 2138 2 12 8 1750 65 33 570 493 176 MD 765 COLLECTOR 438 1 12 0 1750 45 33 571 494 151 MD 765 COLLECTOR 358 1 12 8 1700 50 15 572 495 152 MD 765 COLLECTOR 5571 1 12 8 1700 50 15 FENWICK 573 496 298 STREET COLLECTOR 3458 1 12 4 1700 40 38 574 496 575 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 2123 1 12 4 1700 45 38 575 497 78 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 819 1 12 8 1700 45 28 576 498 132 MD 261 COLLECTOR 9928 1 12 0 1700 50 2 577 499 28 STOAKLEY RD COLLECTOR 2166 2 12 0 1750 45 5 CALVERT BEACH 578 500 153 RD COLLECTOR 391 1 8 0 900 20 21 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K88 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number MINOR 579 501 500 MD 765 ARTERIAL 385 1 12 4 900 20 21 MINOR 580 502 24 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 1616 3 12 0 1750 50 11 MINOR 581 502 26 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 959 2 12 0 1900 50 11 582 503 24 CHURCH ST COLLECTOR 840 1 10 0 1750 40 11 583 503 148 CHURCH ST UNDEFINED 801 1 12 4 1700 40 11 MINOR 584 504 1 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 867 3 12 8 1750 55 2 MINOR 585 504 34 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 10368 2 12 8 1900 60 2 MINOR 586 505 19 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 772 2 12 8 1750 65 21 MINOR 587 505 338 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 3065 2 12 8 1900 65 21 MD 2/4 ON 588 506 505 RAMP FREEWAY RAMP 622 1 12 4 1700 45 21 MINOR 589 507 95 MD 4 ARTERIAL 5376 2 12 8 1900 60 2 590 508 342 MD 402 COLLECTOR 1208 1 12 4 1750 50 11 LOCAL 591 509 508 ARMORY RD ROADWAY 700 1 12 4 1700 30 11 MINOR 592 510 351 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 1923 2 12 8 1900 60 9 MINOR 593 510 354 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 3965 2 12 8 1900 60 9 594 511 89 MD 231 COLLECTOR 907 1 12 4 1700 50 9 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K89 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number 595 511 513 MD 231 COLLECTOR 3657 1 12 4 1700 55 9 HUGHESVILLE INDUSTRIAL LOCAL 596 512 511 PARK RD ROADWAY 1177 2 12 0 1700 40 9 597 513 221 MD 231 COLLECTOR 3974 1 12 4 1750 55 9 598 513 511 MD 231 COLLECTOR 3311 1 12 4 1700 50 9 599 514 350 MD 231 COLLECTOR 926 1 12 8 1125 25 9 MINOR 600 515 87 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 1155 2 12 8 1750 55 9 MINOR 601 515 88 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 1368 2 12 8 1750 55 9 602 516 85 MD ROUTE 6 COLLECTOR 242 2 12 4 1750 45 18 MINOR 603 516 86 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 7812 2 12 4 1750 50 18 LOCAL 604 517 82 MAYPOLE RD ROADWAY 2398 1 12 4 1750 30 38 LOCAL 605 518 81 MERCHANT LN ROADWAY 2707 1 12 4 1750 30 38 606 519 265 MD 235 COLLECTOR 2505 2 10 0 1900 60 53 607 520 2 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1338 3 10 0 1750 60 50 CEDAR POINT LOCAL 608 521 269 RD ROADWAY 1410 2 12 0 1350 30 46 609 521 522 BUSE RD COLLECTOR 2018 2 12 0 1900 30 46 610 522 523 BUSE RD COLLECTOR 1810 2 12 0 1750 35 46 LOCAL 611 523 267 CUDDIHY RD ROADWAY 4063 1 10 0 1350 30 46 612 523 531 BUSE RD COLLECTOR 1730 2 12 0 1750 35 46 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K90 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number LOCAL 613 524 521 BUSE RD ROADWAY 1600 1 12 0 1750 30 46 LOCAL 614 525 524 BUSE RD ROADWAY 2663 1 12 0 1350 30 47 LOCAL 615 525 527 TATE RD ROADWAY 2360 1 12 0 1750 30 47 LOCAL 616 526 525 TATE RD ROADWAY 2887 1 12 0 1350 30 47 CEDAR POINT LOCAL 617 527 521 RD ROADWAY 3680 2 12 0 1750 30 46 LOCAL 618 527 529 TATE RD ROADWAY 1795 1 10 0 1350 30 46 CEDAR POINT LOCAL 619 528 527 RD ROADWAY 1256 2 12 0 1750 30 47 LOCAL 620 529 527 TATE RD ROADWAY 1796 1 12 0 1750 30 46 LOCAL 621 529 587 TATE RD ROADWAY 1721 1 10 0 1350 30 46 LOCAL 622 530 523 CUDDIHY RD ROADWAY 976 1 10 0 1750 30 46 623 531 247 BUSE RD COLLECTOR 909 2 12 0 1900 35 46 LOCAL 624 532 531 W PATROL RD ROADWAY 693 1 12 0 1750 35 46 625 533 52 MD 235 COLLECTOR 646 3 10 0 1750 55 46 626 533 244 MD 235 COLLECTOR 3023 3 10 0 1900 55 46 EXPLORATION LOCAL 627 534 533 PARK DR ROADWAY 641 2 12 0 1750 35 46 628 535 54 MD 235 COLLECTOR 490 3 10 0 1900 50 46 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K91 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number 629 535 55 MD 235 COLLECTOR 458 3 10 0 1750 50 46 630 536 480 MD 245 COLLECTOR 1897 1 10 0 1750 40 29 631 537 315 MD 245 COLLECTOR 3356 1 10 0 1700 40 29 MERVEL DEAN 632 538 307 RD COLLECTOR 1215 1 10 6 1750 35 40 MERVELL DEAN LOCAL 633 538 431 RD ROADWAY 486 1 12 0 1575 35 40 634 539 66 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 5263 1 11 6 1700 60 42 SOUTHERN CONNECTOR 635 540 485 BLVD COLLECTOR 201 1 12 6 900 20 33 636 541 205 MILL BRIDGE RD COLLECTOR 989 1 12 10 1700 45 33 637 542 175 MD 765 COLLECTOR 2803 1 10 6 1700 55 31 LOCAL 638 542 543 MD 765 ROADWAY 2749 1 12 0 1700 40 31 HG TRUEMAN LOCAL 639 543 6 RD ROADWAY 791 1 12 0 1575 35 31 LOCAL 640 543 174 MD 765 ROADWAY 2824 1 12 0 1750 35 34 641 543 542 MD 765 COLLECTOR 2643 1 10 6 1700 55 31 MINOR 642 544 3 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 2061 2 12 8 1750 70 24 MINOR 643 545 333 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 7739 2 12 8 1750 55 18 MINOR 644 545 549 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 4523 2 12 4 1900 50 18 645 546 547 MD 236 COLLECTOR 3851 1 12 4 1700 50 18 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K92 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number EXIT LINK 547 8547 MD 236 COLLECTOR 1553 1 12 4 1900 30 18 MINOR 646 548 545 MD ROUTE 5 ARTERIAL 4533 2 12 8 1900 55 18 647 548 546 MD 236 COLLECTOR 2405 1 12 4 1900 50 18 648 549 516 MD ROUTE 5 UNDEFINED 973 2 12 4 1750 50 18 LOCAL 649 549 548 MD 236 ROADWAY 286 1 12 4 1350 30 18 650 550 552 MD 760 COLLECTOR 1639 1 12 2 1700 50 34 651 551 552 OLIVERT RD COLLECTOR 572 1 12 4 1700 40 34 652 552 184 MD 760 COLLECTOR 75 1 12 2 1125 25 34 LOCAL 653 553 208 SMITHVILLE RD ROADWAY 6298 1 8 0 1350 30 26 MINOR 654 554 25 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 3993 2 12 8 1900 65 11 MINOR 655 554 340 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 2386 2 12 8 1750 65 11 TOWN POINT LOCAL 656 555 556 RD ROADWAY 2641 1 12 4 1350 30 17 EXIT TOWN POINT LOCAL LINK 556 8556 RD ROADWAY 5446 1 12 4 1350 30 17 DAVID GREENE LOCAL 657 557 556 RD ROADWAY 1794 1 12 4 1350 30 17 LOCAL 658 558 559 MD 956 ROADWAY 473 1 12 4 1350 30 44 LOCAL 659 559 203 MD 956 ROADWAY 524 1 12 4 1750 30 44 660 560 22 MD 264 COLLECTOR 2568 1 12 8 1750 55 14 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K93 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number 661 561 379 MD 264 COLLECTOR 3626 1 12 8 1750 50 20 662 562 379 MD 265 COLLECTOR 9001 1 12 0 1750 55 20 663 563 564 MD 265 COLLECTOR 3692 1 12 0 1700 55 23 664 564 143 MD 265 COLLECTOR 6586 1 12 0 1700 55 23 665 565 142 MD 264 COLLECTOR 3340 1 12 8 1700 55 20 666 566 565 MD 264 COLLECTOR 1519 1 12 8 1700 55 20 667 567 380 MD 264 COLLECTOR 1714 1 12 8 1700 50 20 668 568 197 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2107 2 12 8 1900 70 33 669 568 203 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 645 1 12 8 1750 70 44 670 569 149 MAIN ST COLLECTOR 2327 1 10 0 1700 45 11 671 570 319 MD 235 COLLECTOR 4447 2 12 8 1750 70 29 672 570 325 MD 235 COLLECTOR 2312 2 12 8 1900 70 28 673 571 323 MCINTOSH RD COLLECTOR 3164 1 12 4 1700 40 28 674 572 72 MD 245 COLLECTOR 1231 1 10 0 1750 40 29 675 573 312 MD 235 COLLECTOR 5336 2 10 0 1900 60 40 676 573 431 MD 235 COLLECTOR 1227 2 10 0 1900 60 40 WILDEWOOD LOCAL 677 574 576 PKWY ROADWAY 965 1 12 4 1575 30 40 678 575 83 MD ROUTE 5 COLLECTOR 2054 2 12 4 1750 45 38 WILDEWOOD LOCAL 679 576 295 PKWY ROADWAY 1026 1 12 4 1575 30 40 LOCAL 680 576 577 SMOKE HILL RD ROADWAY 1193 1 12 2 1575 30 40 COTTONWOOD LOCAL 681 577 304 PARKWAY ROADWAY 972 1 12 2 1575 30 40 682 578 15 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 2447 2 12 8 1900 55 43 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K94 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Saturation Free Up Down Lane Shoulder Flow Flow Stream Stream Length No. of Width Width Rate Speed Grid Link # Node Node Roadway Name Roadway Type (ft.) Lanes (ft.) (ft.) (pcphpl) (mph) Number 683 578 16 MD 2/4 COLLECTOR 593 1 12 8 1750 55 43 MINOR 684 578 68 MD 2/4 ARTERIAL 741 1 12 4 1350 30 43 MINOR 685 579 68 MD 235 ARTERIAL 387 2 10 0 1900 55 43 MINOR 686 579 69 MD 235 ARTERIAL 2738 2 10 0 1750 55 43 CEDAR POINT LOCAL 687 580 528 RD ROADWAY 1178 1 12 4 1350 30 47 LOCAL 688 581 526 TATE RD ROADWAY 2793 1 12 4 1350 30 47 LOCAL 689 582 525 BUSE RD ROADWAY 2931 1 10 0 1350 30 47 LOCAL 690 582 528 RUNWAY ROADWAY 2807 2 12 4 1350 30 47 LOCAL 691 583 582 BUSE RD ROADWAY 2945 1 10 0 1350 30 47 LOCAL 692 584 580 SAUFLEY RD ROADWAY 2233 1 12 4 1350 30 47 CEDAR POINT LOCAL 693 585 580 RD ROADWAY 2524 1 12 4 1350 30 47 LOCAL 694 586 528 MILLSTONE RD ROADWAY 2326 1 12 4 1350 30 47 695 587 588 TATE RD COLLECTOR 1565 1 10 0 1350 30 46 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K95 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table K2. Nodes in the LinkNode Analysis Network which are Controlled X Y Control Grid Map Node Coordinate Coordinate (ft) (ft) Type Number 1 1424576 362410 Actuated 2 2 1469535 218632 TCP Actuated 50 3 1465173 279962 Actuated 24 4 1465878 276999 Actuated 24 5 1468998 271093 Stop 31 6 1472874 265787 Stop 31 7 1473744 263508 TCP Actuated 31 8 1471661 258212 Actuated 33 9 1470347 255932 Actuated 33 16 1450149 232347 TCP Actuated 43 18 1457106 285655 TCP Actuated 21 19 1452262 292560 Actuated 21 20 1450714 300487 Stop 15 21 1446530 303589 Stop 14 22 1444665 303988 TCP Actuated 14 23 1436837 306908 Stop 14 24 1430086 317114 TCP Actuated 11 27 1426607 327134 Stop 5 28 1427162 325054 Actuated 5 29 1424967 334359 Actuated 5 32 1420266 347078 Yield 4 34 1425137 351189 Stop 2 38 1428073 323400 Actuated 11 39 1428845 322134 Actuated 11 45 1451646 231271 Actuated 45 46 1453533 230071 Actuated 45 47 1454982 229322 Actuated 45 48 1455793 228870 Actuated 45 49 1457711 227857 TCP Actuated 45 50 1460392 227124 TCP Actuated 45 51 1466078 222110 Actuated 46 52 1465483 223477 Actuated 46 53 1465809 222882 Stop 46 54 1467090 220671 Actuated 46 55 1467593 219867 Actuated 46 57 1468807 218252 Actuated 50 58 1467760 217724 Actuated 50 59 1466997 217322 Actuated 50 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K96 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

X Y Control Grid Map Node Coordinate Coordinate (ft) (ft) Type Number 60 1466051 216836 Actuated 50 61 1460742 214024 Actuated 49 62 1459242 212547 Actuated 49 63 1458925 211754 Actuated 49 64 1457226 207919 Actuated 49 65 1455710 208271 Actuated 49 66 1439383 225048 Stop 42 67 1449058 231317 Actuated 45 69 1447129 234044 Actuated 40 70 1445840 235447 Actuated 40 71 1435230 247670 TCP Actuated 29 72 1442798 255053 TCP Actuated 29 73 1414534 264097 TCP Actuated 28 74 1411098 266087 Stop 28 75 1399817 273776 Stop 19 76 1393413 277243 Actuated 18 77 1403338 254186 Stop 28 81 1408578 234131 Actuated 38 82 1410373 232620 Actuated 38 83 1417012 229738 Actuated 38 85 1376802 293894 Actuated 18 86 1376760 301706 Actuated 9 87 1376709 303774 Actuated 9 88 1376845 306293 Actuated 9 90 1420374 307756 Stop 10 91 1420377 301853 TCP Actuated 10 92 1427721 315967 Stop 11 93 1427393 366853 Stop 2 99 1413984 361373 Stop 1 100 1419700 361882 Stop 1 102 1424026 363026 Actuated 2 106 1414921 357932 Stop 1 107 1416902 349409 Stop 4 115 1423615 335998 Stop 5 117 1417264 338797 Stop 4 118 1422997 345445 Actuated 5 119 1422562 339623 Stop 5 123 1441359 346015 Stop 5 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K97 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

X Y Control Grid Map Node Coordinate Coordinate (ft) (ft) Type Number 130 1426429 365100 Actuated 2 135 1414662 306094 Stop 10 136 1439006 323770 TCP Uncontrolled 12 139 1447075 305894 Stop 14 148 1430897 318541 Stop 11 150 1446983 304030 Stop 14 152 1451302 300768 Stop 15 156 1455912 293589 Stop 21 159 1463795 283444 Stop 24 165 1467179 274582 Stop 24 173 1467649 266563 TCP Uncontrolled 31 174 1475311 263427 TCP Actuated 34 176 1472542 257363 Actuated 33 179 1481027 261777 Stop 34 184 1474900 251414 Yield 34 187 1474248 258551 Actuated 33 188 1474698 258014 Stop 34 193 1477200 248583 Stop 34 195 1467770 249451 Stop 33 197 1466129 247153 Stop 33 198 1466855 248097 Actuated 33 202 1467060 248033 Stop 33 205 1470084 256017 Yield 33 209 1518431 296711 TCP Actuated 25 212 1526403 262341 Stop 35 217 1399227 309308 Stop 10 221 1384500 317889 Actuated 9 224 1459115 237189 Stop 43 231 1456321 228614 Actuated 45 242 1462196 226070 Stop 46 244 1462585 225729 Stop 46 248 1466770 221181 Stop 46 250 1477936 211968 Actuated 53 256 1476526 201046 Stop 53 258 1470268 202898 Stop 52 265 1475364 214501 Stop 53 267 1470010 218938 Stop 50 270 1468184 203366 Stop 52 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K98 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

X Y Control Grid Map Node Coordinate Coordinate (ft) (ft) Type Number 276 1463987 215746 Stop 50 278 1463246 215365 Stop 50 282 1458479 210654 Stop 49 285 1458446 207663 Stop 49 288 1449468 208472 Actuated 49 291 1421450 225605 Actuated 38 293 1447723 229419 TCP Actuated 42 299 1419777 238507 Stop 38 300 1424050 238928 TCP Actuated 39 304 1444400 235499 Stop 40 305 1444521 237665 Stop 40 307 1442537 239707 Actuated 40 309 1435917 246851 Stop 29 310 1439932 243065 TCP Actuated 40 312 1438769 243561 Stop 40 316 1433108 250153 TCP Actuated 29 318 1429637 255091 TCP Actuated 29 319 1423989 258627 TCP Actuated 29 325 1418039 261838 Stop 28 328 1404571 257560 Stop 28 330 1409377 267458 Stop 28 333 1385703 284107 Actuated 18 335 1448836 303098 Stop 15 338 1451956 296385 Stop 21 339 1443574 304363 Yield 14 340 1431347 316008 Actuated 11 342 1429622 320752 Actuated 11 346 1422647 342095 Stop 5 350 1374801 315750 Yield 9 379 1441471 293149 TCP Actuated 20 382 1442821 274438 TCP Uncontrolled 20 384 1454589 289450 Stop 21 390 1424224 315576 Actuated 11 391 1422096 313052 TCP Actuated 11 420 1410405 307073 Stop 10 423 1403876 309481 Stop 10 431 1443067 238600 Stop 40 436 1441467 304949 Stop 14 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K99 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

X Y Control Grid Map Node Coordinate Coordinate (ft) (ft) Type Number 438 1443521 325188 TCP Uncontrolled 5 441 1426170 328828 Stop 5 480 1436025 247782 TCP Actuated 29 485 1470437 254467 Yield 33 486 1469777 254546 Actuated 33 494 1449575 303143 Stop 15 497 1400219 257817 Stop 28 498 1445385 349908 Stop 5 500 1454310 293770 TCP Uncontrolled 21 506 1452628 292899 TCP Uncontrolled 21 508 1430629 321426 Actuated 11 511 1377047 316248 Stop 9 514 1375699 315998 Yield 9 516 1377044 293899 Actuated 18 521 1471798 220351 Actuated 46 523 1469324 222373 TCP Actuated 46 525 1475764 221078 Stop 47 527 1474370 222982 Actuated 47 531 1467597 222473 Actuated 46 533 1464980 223884 Actuated 46 540 1470644 254446 Yield 33 548 1376980 292823 Stop 18 552 1474966 251379 Yield 34 556 1543316 320773 Stop 17 565 1442148 295721 TCP Uncontrolled 20 566 1441788 294244 TCP Uncontrolled 20 567 1437871 285060 TCP Uncontrolled 20 569 1433433 314916 TCP Uncontrolled 11 570 1420028 260655 TCP Uncontrolled 28 573 1442243 239510 TCP Actuated 40 577 1443770 234346 Stop 40 580 1476312 224448 Stop 47 1

Coordinates are in the North American Datum of 1983 Maryland Plane Zone Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant K100 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

APPENDIX L Zone Boundaries

L. ZONE BOUNDARIES Zone 1 County: Calvert Defined as the area within the following boundary: Area bounded on the north by Calvert Beach Road, on the east by the Chesapeake Bay, on the south by Breeden Road, Sollers Wharf Road, Old Mill Road, Hellen Creek, St. Paul Branch, Route 492 and Calvert Cliffs State Park, and on the west by Route 2/4 and St. Leonard Creek.

Zone 2 County: Calvert Defined as the area within the following boundary: Area bounded on the north by Route 2/4 and Governor Run Road, on the east by the Chesapeake Bay, Route 2/4, and St. Leonard Creek, on the south by Calvert Beach Road and the Patuxent River and on the west by Broomes Island Road and Nan Cove.

Zone 3 County: Calvert Defined as the area within the following boundary: Area bounded on the north by Breeden Road, Sollers Wharf Road, Old Mill Road, Hellen Creek, St.

Paul Branch, Route 497 and Calvert Cliffs State Park, on the east by the Chesapeake Bay, and on the south and west by the Patuxent River.

Zone 4 County: Calvert Defined as the area within the following boundary: Area bounded on the north by Route 2 & 4, on the east by Broomes Island Road and Nan Cove, on the south by the Patuxent River and on the west by Route 231, Adelina Road and Sheridan Road.

Zone 5 County: Calvert Defined as the area within the following boundary: Area bounded on the north by Dares Beach Road and Cassell Road, on the east by the Chesapeake Bay, on the south by Governor Run Road, and on the west by Tobacco Ridge Road (to Calvert County Property Gate), Main Street at Monitor Way (to Calvert Towne), and Route 2/4 (at Calvert Towne).

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant L1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Zone 6 County: St. Marys Defined as the area within the following boundary: Area bounded on the north by the Patuxent River, on the east by Hollywood Road and Sotterly Gate Road, on the south by Brooks Run, and on the west by Cat Creek Road, Sandgates Road, Route 235, Clover Hill Road, McIntosh Road, Riva Ridge Drive and McIntosh Run.

Zone 7 County: St. Marys Defined as the area within the following boundary: Area bounded on the north by the Patuxent River, on the east by the Patuxent Naval Air Test Center, on the south by Brooks Run, Broad Run, Hayden Road, St. Marys County Airport Drive, Cottonwood Parkway, Wildewood Parkway, Saint Andrews Church Road and Route 235, and on the west by Hollywood Road and Sotterly Gate Road.

Zone 8 County: Dorchester Defined as the area within the following boundary: Includes all of Taylors Island, Smithville, and residents off Meekins Neck Road, Smithville Road (north of Beaver Dam Creek), and Route 16 (west of Parsons Creek).

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant L2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

APPENDIX M Evacuation Sensitivity Studies

M. EVACUATION SENSITIVITY STUDIES This appendix presents the results of a series of sensitivity analyses. These analyses are designed to identify the sensitivity of the ETE to changes in some base evacuation conditions.

M.1 Effect of Changes in Trip Generation Times A sensitivity study was performed to determine whether changes in the estimated trip generation time have an effect on the ETE for the entire EPZ. Specifically, if the tail of the mobilization distribution were truncated (i.e., if those who responded most slowly to the Advisory to Evacuate, could be persuaded to respond much more rapidly), how would the ETE be affected? The case considered was Scenario 1, Region 3; a summer, midweek, midday, good weather evacuation of the entire EPZ. Table M1 presents the results of this study.

Table M1. Evacuation Time Estimates for Trip Generation Sensitivity Study Trip Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Generation Period 90th Percentile 100th Percentile 2 Hours45 Minutes 6:15 8:45 4 Hours 6:20 8:45 5 Hours (Base) 6:20 8:50 As discussed in Section 7.3, for the base case, traffic congestion persists within the EPZ for about 81/2 hours. As such, the ETE for the 100th percentile are not affected by the trip generation time, but by the time needed to clear the congestion within the EPZ. The congestion involves sufficient evacuees to also make the 90th percentile ETE insensitive to the truncation of the tail of the mobilization time distribution.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant M1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

M.2 Effect of Changes in the Number of People in the Shadow Region Who Relocate A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE of changes in the percentage of people who decide to relocate from the Shadow Region. The case considered was Scenario 1, Region 3; a summer, midweek, midday, good weather evacuation for the entire EPZ. The movement of people in the Shadow Region has the potential to impede vehicles evacuating from an Evacuation Region within the EPZ. Refer to Sections 3.2 and 7.1 for additional information on population within the shadow region.

Table M2 presents the evacuation time estimates for each of the cases considered. The results show that the ETE is not impacted by the shadow evacuation percentage. Even tripling the shadow percentage did not increase the ETE for the 90th and 100th percentiles.

Table M2. Evacuation Time Estimates for Shadow Sensitivity Study Evacuating Evacuation Time Estimate for Entire EPZ Percent Shadow Shadow Evacuation Vehicles 90th Percentile 100th Percentile 0 0 6:20 7:45 10 5,743 6:15 8:50 20 (Base) 7,657 6:20 8:50 60 22,971 6:15 8:50 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant M2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

M.3 Effect of Changes in EPZ Resident Population A sensitivity study was conducted to determine the effect on ETE of changes in the resident population within the study area (EPZ plus Shadow Region). As population in the study area changes over time, the time required to evacuate the public may increase, decrease, or remain the same. Since the ETE is related to the demand to capacity ratio present within the study area, changes in population will cause the demand side of the equation to change. The sensitivity study was conducted using the following planning assumptions:

1. The population within the study area was increased by varying amounts up to 7%.

Changes in population were applied to permanent residents only (as per federal guidance), in both the EPZ area and in the Shadow Region.

2. The transportation infrastructure remained fixed; the presence of new roads or highway capacity improvements were not considered.

3. The study was performed for the 2Mile Region (R01), the 5Mile Region (R02) and the entire EPZ (R03).

4. The good weather scenario which yielded the highest ETE values was selected as the case to be considered in this sensitivity study (Scenario 3).

Table M3 presents the results of the sensitivity study.Section IV of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, and NUREG/CR7002, Section 5.4, require licensees to provide an updated ETE analysis to the NRC when a population increase within the EPZ causes ETE values (for the 2Mile Region, 5 Mile Region or entire EPZ) to increase by 25 percent or 30 minutes, whichever is less. Note that all of the base ETE values are greater than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />; 25 percent of the base ETE is always greater than 30 minutes. Therefore, 30 minutes is the lesser and is the criterion for updating.

Those percent population changes which result in ETE changes greater than 30 minutes are highlighted in red below - a 7% increase in the EPZ population. CENG will have to estimate the EPZ population on an annual basis. If the EPZ population increases 7% or more, an updated ETE analysis will be needed. Comparing the results of M3 with M2, it can be seen that the ETE is sensitive to EPZ population changes but not to shadow population changes. This is due to the fact that the ETE is determined by the congestion within the EPZ.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant M3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Table M3. ETE Variation with Population Change Population Change Resident Base 5% 7%

Population 52,652 55,285 56,338 ETE for 90th Percentile Region Population Change Base 5% 7%

2MILE 2:10 2:15 2:15 5MILE 7:45 8:05 8:10 FULL EPZ 6:55 7:15 7:20 ETE for 100th Percentile Region Population Change Base 5% 7%

2MILE 5:00 5:00 5:00 5MILE 9:15 9:35 9:40 FULL EPZ 9:30 9:50 10:00 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant M4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

M.4 Zone 1 and Zone 3 Evacuating both North and South A sensitivity study related to the evacuation of Zone 1 & 3 was carried out. Zone 3 in Calvert County has the highest population among all zones within the EPZ. It has a resident population (2010 Census) of 19,752 (10,310) which is 38% of the population of the entire EPZ.

The existing public information for CCNPP suggests that those people in Zone 3 should evacuate southbound along Maryland Route 2/4. This routing pattern produces prolonged congestion on Route 2/4 southbound, while there is far less congestion northbound. A sensitivity study was performed to analyze the impact of rerouting some of the evacuees from Zone 3 northbound on Route 2/4 as well as all the residents of Zone 1. This alternative would be useful in cases where there has not been a release of radiation and therefore is safe to pass through the 2mile ring.

The cases considered were Scenario 1, Region 1, Region 2 and Region 3. Table M4 clearly indicates that the ETE for Regions 2 and 3 are greatly reduced by allowing Zone 3 evacuees to travel northbound on Route 2/4 and therefore avoid the bottleneck at the lane drop before the T.J Bridge. The EAS could be used to advise people of the safest evacuation route, given the specifics of the emergency.

Table M4. ETE Variation with Increase in NB Evacuation Direction of Travel of Evacuation Time Estimate Evacuees 90th Percentile 100th Percentile Zone 1 to north, Zone 3 to both north and south R01 2:25 5:05 R02 3:50 5:05 R03 4:15 5:10 Zone 3 to south (base case, matching public information)

R01 2:20 5:00 R02 7:00 8:20 R03 6:20 8:50 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant M5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

M.5 Contraflow South over the Thomas Johnson Bridge The T.J. Bridge is a bottleneck to the southbound traffic flow. This sensitivity study considers the impact of establishing a contraflow lane southbound over the bridge, resulting in 2 moving lanes instead of one.

The ramp 670 feet north of Lore Road onto MD 2/4 could be used to access the northbound roadway north of the contraflow section, if necessary. The contraflow could begin just south of that location and run over the bridge, past South Patuxent Beach Road and terminate at Oak Drive, where the roadway opens back up to two lanes.

The scenario considered was Scenario 1 (summer, midweek, midday, good weather). ETE were calculated for Regions 1, 2 and 3.

As can be seen from Table M5, the three and a half mile stretch of contraflow reduced the 90th and 100th percentile ETE for the full EPZ by 1:35 and 2:00, respectively. For the situation where all Zone 3 and some of Zone 1 evacuees are routed to the south, because it is unsafe to pass within two miles of the plant, contraflow could be a valuable mitigation technique and is worth consideration.

With the contraflow in place, the last links to clear in the simulation are the roadways leading out of the housing estates, due to it being difficult for evacuees to make a left onto MD 2/4 and merge into a stream of evacuating traffic. The intersections of Rousby Hall Road and Southern Connector Boulevard may need traffic control personnel to assist the side street traffic.

Table M5. Impact on ETE of SB Contraflow Evacuation Time Estimate Region 90th Percentile 100th Percentile With contraflow SB over T.J. Bridge R01 2:20 5:05 R02 4:00 5:05 R03 4:45 6:50 No contraflow, bridge 1 lane Zone 3 to south (base case matching public information)

R01 2:20 5:00 R02 7:00 8:20 R03 6:20 8:50 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant M6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

M.6 Contraflow North on MD Route 2/4 This sensitivity study considers the impact of establishing a contraflow lane on the southbound side of MD Route 2/4, north of the plant, in order to provide additional northbound evacuation lanes. Since NB contraflow is relevant for the situation where people can evacuate both north and south, the table below compares the NB contraflow ETE to both the alternate routing case (Zone 3 both north and south) and the base case (Zone 3 evacuates to the south).

The scenario considered was Scenario 1 (summer, midweek, midday, good weather). ETE were calculated for Regions 1, 2 and 3.

Table M6. Impact on ETE of NB Contraflow Direction of Travel of Evacuation Time Estimate Evacuees 90th Percentile 100th Percentile Contraflow north Zone 1 to north, Zone 3 to both north and south R01 2:25 5:05 R02 3:35 5:05 R03 3:25 5:10 Zone 1 to north, Zone 3 to both north and south, no contraflow (see M4)

R01 2:25 5:05 R02 3:50 5:05 R03 4:15 5:10 Zone 3 to south (base case matching public information)

R01 2:20 5:00 R02 7:00 8:20 R03 6:20 8:50 Establishing and maintaining contraflow along this highway would be labor and equipment intensive because every entry to the highway for southbound travel would need to be barricaded or policed. If conditions permit the routing of Zone 3 evacuees both north and south, the incremental benefit from the NB contraflow is very small (only the ETE for R03 at the 90th percentile was reduced).

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant M7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

M.7 MD 235 Prohibited for Evacuees from Zone 3 This sensitivity study considers the impact of prohibiting the right turn from MD 2/4 to MD 235 northbound. This sensitivity was developed in case a plume was to blow in a direction towards Zones 6 & 7. Emergency planners stated that, under such conditions, they would not recommend vehicles evacuating along MD 235 because it could potentially pass them through the plume. The scenario considered was Scenario 1 (summer, midweek, midday, good weather).

Table M7. Impact on ETE with MD 235 Prohibited Direction of Travel of Evacuation Time Estimate Evacuees 90th Percentile 100th Percentile MD 235 Prohibited to Zone 3 Evacuees R01 2:20 5:00 R02 7:30 8:50 R03 8:00 10:20 Base Case (R turn on MD 235 allowed)

R01 2:20 5:00 R02 7:00 8:20 R03 6:20 8:50 By prohibiting the right turn onto MD 235, roadway capacity is reduced while vehicles are forced to continue on MD 4. According to the results in Table M7, ETE are increased by up to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 40 minutes (Region R03) for the 90th percentile and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 30 minutes (Region R03) for the 100th percentile.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant M8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

APPENDIX N ETE Criteria Checklist

N. ETE CRITERIA CHECKLIST Table N1. ETE Review Criteria Checklist NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis 1.0 Introduction

a. The emergency planning zone (EPZ) and surrounding area Yes Section 1 should be described.

b. A map should be included that identifies primary features Yes Figure 11 of the site, including major roadways, significant topographical features, boundaries of counties, and population centers within the EPZ.

c. A comparison of the current and previous ETE should be Yes Table 13 provided and includes similar information as identified in Table 11, ETE Comparison, of NUREG/CR7002.

1.1 Approach

a. A discussion of the approach and level of detail obtained Yes Section 1.3 during the field survey of the roadway network should be provided.

b. Sources of demographic data for schools, special facilities, Yes Section 2.1 large employers, and special events should be identified. Section 3

c. Discussion should be presented on use of traffic control Yes Section 1.3, Section 2.3, Section 9, plans in the analysis. Appendix G

d. Traffic simulation models used for the analyses should be Yes Section 1.3, Table 13, Appendix B, C and D identified by name and version.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N1 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

e. Methods used to address data uncertainties should be Yes Section 3 - avoid double counting described. Section 5, Appendix F - 4.5% sampling error at 95% confidence interval for telephone survey 1.2 Assumptions

a. The planning basis for the ETE includes the assumption Yes Section 2.3 - Assumption 1 that the evacuation should be ordered promptly and no Section 5.1 early protective actions have been implemented.

b. Assumptions consistent with Table 12, General Yes Sections 2.2, 2.3 Assumptions, of NUREG/CR7002 should be provided and include the basis to support their use.

1.3 Scenario Development

a. The ten scenarios in Table 13, Evacuation Scenarios, Yes Tables 21, 62 should be developed for the ETE analysis, or a reason should be provided for use of other scenarios.

1.3.1 Staged Evacuation

a. A discussion should be provided on the approach used in Yes Sections 5.4.2, 7.2 development of a staged evacuation.

1.4 Evacuation Planning Areas

a. A map of EPZ with emergency response planning areas Yes Figure 61 (ERPAs) should be included.

b. A table should be provided identifying the ERPAs Yes Table 61 considered for each ETE calculation by downwind direction in each sector.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N2 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

c. A table similar to Table 14, Evacuation Areas for a Staged Yes Table 75 Evacuation Keyhole, of NUREG/CR7002 should be provided and includes the complete evacuation of the 2, 5, and 10 mile areas and for the 2 mile area/5 mile keyhole evacuations.

2.0 Demand Estimation

a. Demand estimation should be developed for the four Yes Permanent residents, employees, population groups, including permanent residents of the transients - Section 3, Appendix E EPZ, transients, special facilities, and schools. Special facilities, schools - Section 8, Appendix E 2.1 Permanent Residents and Transient Population

a. The US Census should be the source of the population Yes Section 3.1 values, or another credible source should be provided.

b. Population values should be adjusted as necessary for Yes 2010 used as the base year for analysis. No growth to reflect population estimates to the year of the growth of population necessary.

ETE.

c. A sector diagram should be included, similar to Figure 21, Yes Figure 32 Population by Sector, of NUREG/CR7002, showing the population distribution for permanent residents.

2.1.1 Permanent Residents with Vehicles

a. The persons per vehicle value should be between 1 and 2 Yes 1.92 persons per vehicle - Table 13 or justification should be provided for other values.

b. Major employers should be listed. Yes Appendix E - Table E3 2.1.2 Transient Population Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N3 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

a. A list of facilities which attract transient populations Yes Section 3.3, Appendix E should be included, and peak and average attendance for these facilities should be listed. The source of information used to develop attendance values should be provided.

b. The average population during the season should be used, Yes Table 34, 35 and Appendix E itemize the itemized and totaled for each scenario. transient population and employee estimates. These estimates are multiplied by the scenario specific percentages provided in Table 63 to estimate transient population by scenario.

c. The percent of permanent residents assumed to be at Yes Sections 3.3, 3.4 facilities should be estimated.

d. The number of people per vehicle should be provided. Yes Sections 3.3, 3.4 Numbers may vary by scenario, and if so, discussion on why values vary should be provided.

e. A sector diagram should be included, similar to Figure 21 Yes Figure 36 - transients of NUREG/CR7002, showing the population distribution Figure 38 - employees for the transient population.

2.2 Transit Dependent Permanent Residents

a. The methodology used to determine the number of transit Yes Section 8.1, Table 81 dependent residents should be discussed.

b. Transportation resources needed to evacuate this group Yes Section 8.1, Tables 85, 810 should be quantified.

c. The county/local evacuation plans for transit dependent Yes Sections 8.1, 8.4 residents should be used in the analysis.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N4 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

d. The methodology used to determine the number of Yes Section 8.5 people with disabilities and those with access and functional needs who may need assistance and do not reside in special facilities should be provided. Data from local/county registration programs should be used in the estimate, but should not be the only set of data.

e. Capacities should be provided for all types of Yes Section 2.3 - Assumption 9 transportation resources. Bus seating capacity of 50% Sections 3.5, 8.1, 8.2, 8.3 should be used or justification should be provided for higher values.

f. An estimate of this population should be provided and Yes Table 81 - transit dependents information should be provided that the existing Section 8.5 - special needs registration programs were used in developing the estimate.

g. A summary table of the total number of buses, Yes Sections 8.3, 8.4 ambulances, or other transport needed to support Table 85 evacuation should be provided and the quantification of resources should be detailed enough to assure double counting has not occurred.

2.3 Special Facility Residents

a. A list of special facilities, including the type of facility, Yes Appendix E, Table E3 - lists facilities, type, location, and average population should be provided. location, and population Special facility staff should be included in the total special facility population.

b. A discussion should be provided on how special facility Yes Sections 8.3 data was obtained.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N5 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

c. The number of wheelchair and bedbound individuals Yes Table 84 should be provided.

d. An estimate of the number and capacity of vehicles Yes Section 8.3 needed to support the evacuation of the facility should be Tables 84, 85 provided.

e. The logistics for mobilizing specially trained staff (e.g., Yes Section 8.4 No correctional facilities exist medical support or security support for prisons, jails, and within the EPZ.

other correctional facilities) should be discussed when appropriate.

2.4 Schools

a. A list of schools including name, location, student Yes Table 82 population, and transportation resources required to Section 8.2 support the evacuation, should be provided. The source of this information should be provided.

b. Transportation resources for elementary and middle Yes Table 82 schools should be based on 100% of the school capacity.

c. The estimate of high school students who will use their Yes Section 8.2 personal vehicle to evacuate should be provided and a basis for the values used should be discussed.

d. The need for return trips should be identified if necessary. Yes There are sufficient resources to evacuate schools in a single wave. However, Section 8.4 and Figure 81 discuss the potential for a multiple wave evacuation Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N6 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis 2.5.1 Special Events

a. A complete list of special events should be provided and Yes Section 3.8 includes information on the population, estimated duration, and season of the event.

b. The special event that encompasses the peak transient Yes Section 3.8 population should be analyzed in the ETE.

c. The percent of permanent residents attending the event Yes Section 3.8 should be estimated.

2.5.2 Shadow Evacuation

a. A shadow evacuation of 20 percent should be included for Yes Section 2.2 - Assumption 5 areas outside the evacuation area extending to 15 miles Figure 21 from the NPP.

Section 3.2

b. Population estimates for the shadow evacuation in the 10 Yes Section 3.2 to 15 mile area beyond the EPZ are provided by sector. Figure 34 Table 33

c. The loading of the shadow evacuation onto the roadway Yes Section 5 - Table 59 network should be consistent with the trip generation time generated for the permanent resident population.

2.5.3 Background and Pass Through Traffic

a. The volume of background traffic and pass through traffic Yes Section 3.7 is based on the average daytime traffic. Values may be reduced for nighttime scenarios.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N7 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

b. Pass through traffic is assumed to have stopped entering Yes Section 2.3 - Assumption 5 the EPZ about two hours after the initial notification. Section 3.7 2.6 Summary of Demand Estimation

a. A summary table should be provided that identifies the Yes total populations and total vehicles used in analysis for Tables 37, 38 permanent residents, transients, transit dependent residents, special facilities, schools, shadow population, and passthrough demand used in each scenario.

3.0 Roadway Capacity

a. The method(s) used to assess roadway capacity should be Yes Section 4 discussed.

3.1 Roadway Characteristics

a. A field survey of key routes within the EPZ has been Yes Section 1.3 conducted.

b. Information should be provided describing the extent of Yes Section 1.3 the survey, and types of information gathered and used in the analysis.

c. A table similar to that in Appendix A, Roadway Yes Appendix K, Table K1 Characteristics, of NUREG/CR7002 should be provided.

d. Calculations for a representative roadway segment should Yes Section 4 be provided.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N8 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

e. A legible map of the roadway system that identifies node Yes Appendix K, Figures K1 through K55 numbers and segments used to develop the ETE should be present the entire linknode analysis provided and should be similar to Figure 31, Roadway network at a scale suitable to identify all Network Identifying Nodes and Segments, of NUREG/CR links and nodes 7002.

3.2 Capacity Analysis

a. The approach used to calculate the roadway capacity for Yes Section 4 the transportation network should be described in detail and identifies factors that should be expressly used in the modeling.

b. The capacity analysis identifies where field information Yes Section 1.3, Section 4 should be used in the ETE calculation.

3.3 Intersection Control

a. A list of intersections should be provided that includes the Yes Appendix K, Table K2 total number of intersections modeled that are unsignalized, signalized, or manned by response personnel.

b. Characteristics for the 10 highest volume intersections Yes Table J1 within the EPZ are provided including the location, signal cycle length, and turn lane queue capacity.

c. Discussion should be provided on how signal cycle time is Yes Section 4.1, Appendix C.

used in the calculations.

3.4 Adverse Weather Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N9 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

a. The adverse weather condition should be identified and Yes Table 21, Section 2.3 - Assumption 8 the effects of adverse weather on mobilization time Mobilization time - Table 22, Section 5.3 should be considered. (page 510)

b. The speed and capacity reduction factors identified in Yes Table 22 - based on HCM 2010. The Table 31, Weather Capacity Factors, of NUREG/CR7002 factors provided in Table 31 of should be used or a basis should be provided for other NUREG/CR7002 are from HCM 2000.

values.

c. The study identifies assumptions for snow removal on Yes Section 5.3 - page 510 streets and driveways, when applicable. Appendix F - Section F.3.3 4.0 Development of Evacuation Times 4.1 Trip Generation Time

a. The process used to develop trip generation times should Yes Section 5 be identified.

b. When telephone surveys are used, the scope of the Yes Appendix F survey, area of survey, number of participants, and statistical relevance should be provided.

c. Data obtained from telephone surveys should be Yes Appendix F summarized.

d. The trip generation time for each population group should Yes Section 5, Appendix F be developed from site specific information.

4.1.1 Permanent Residents and Transient Population Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N10 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

a. Permanent residents are assumed to evacuate from their Yes Section 5 discusses trip generation for homes but are not assumed to be at home at all times. households with and without returning Trip generation time includes the assumption that a commuters. Table 63 presents the percentage of residents will need to return home prior to percentage of households with returning evacuating. commuters and the percentage of households either without returning commuters or with no commuters.

Appendix F presents the percent households who will await the return of commuters.

b. Discussion should be provided on the time and method Yes Section 5.4.3 used to notify transients. The trip generation time discusses any difficulties notifying persons in hard to reach areas such as on lakes or in campgrounds.

c. The trip generation time accounts for transients Yes Section 5, Figure 51 potentially returning to hotels prior to evacuating.

d. Effect of public transportation resources used during Yes Section 3.8 special events where a large number of transients should be expected should be considered.

e. The trip generation time for the transient population Yes Section 5, Table 59 should be integrated and loaded onto the transportation network with the general public.

4.1.2 Transit Dependent Residents Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N11 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

a. If available, existing plans and bus routes should be used Yes Section 8.3 - page 87. Preestablished bus in the ETE analysis. If new plans should be developed with routes do not exist. Basic bus routes were the ETE, they have been agreed upon by the responsible developed for the ETE analysis - see Figure authorities. 82, Table 810.

b. Discussion should be included on the means of evacuating Yes Section 8.4 ambulatory and nonambulatory residents.

c. The number, location, and availability of buses, and other Yes Section 8.4 resources needed to support the demand estimation should be provided.

d. Logistical details, such as the time to obtain buses, brief Yes Section 8.4, Figure 81 drivers, and initiate the bus route should be provided.

e. Discussion should identify the time estimated for transit Yes Section 8.4 dependent residents to prepare and travel to a bus pickup point, and describes the expected means of travel to the pickup point.

f. The number of bus stops and time needed to load Yes Section 8.4 passengers should be discussed.

g. A map of bus routes should be included. Yes Figure 82 & Figure 83

h. The trip generation time for nonambulatory persons Yes Section 8.3 includes the time to mobilize ambulances or special vehicles, time to drive to the home of residents, loading time, and time to drive out of the EPZ should be provided.

i. Information should be provided to supports analysis of Yes Sections 8.4 return trips, if necessary. Figure 81 Tables 87 through 89 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N12 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis 4.1.3 Special Facilities

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization times Yes Section 84, Tables 86 through 87, 810 should be provided. through 811

b. Discussion should be provided on the inbound and Yes Sections 8.4 outbound speeds.

c. The number of wheelchair and bedbound individuals Yes Tables 84 should be provided, and the logistics of evacuating these residents should be discussed.

d. Time for loading of residents should be provided Yes Section 8.4

e. Information should be provided that indicates whether Yes Section 8.4, Table 84 the evacuation can be completed in a single trip or if additional trips should be needed.

f. If return trips should be needed, the destination of Yes Section 8.4 vehicles should be provided.

g. Discussion should be provided on whether special facility Yes Section 8.4 residents are expected to pass through the reception center prior to being evacuated to their final destination.

h. Supporting information should be provided to quantify the Yes Section 8.4. Tables 811 through 812 time elements for the return trips.

4.1.4 Schools

a. Information on evacuation logistics and mobilization time Yes Section 8.4 should be provided.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N13 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

b. Discussion should be provided on the inbound and Yes School bus routes are presented in Table outbound speeds. 86.

School bus speeds are presented in Tables 87 (good weather), 88 (rain), and 89 (snow). Outbound speeds are defined as the minimum of the evacuation route speed and the State school bus speed limit.

Inbound speeds are limited to the State school bus speed limit.

c. Time for loading of students should be provided. Yes Tables 87 through 89, Discussion in Section 8.4

d. Information should be provided that indicates whether Yes Section 8.4 - page 86 the evacuation can be completed in a single trip or if additional trips are needed.

e. If return trips are needed, the destination of school buses Yes Return trips are not needed should be provided.

f. If used, reception centers should be identified. Discussion Yes Table 83. Students are evacuated to host should be provided on whether students are expected to schools where they will be picked up by pass through the reception center prior to being parents or guardians.

evacuated to their final destination.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N14 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

g. Supporting information should be provided to quantify the Yes Return trips are not needed. Tables 87 time elements for the return trips. through 89 provide time needed to arrive at host school, which could be used to compute a second wave evacuation if necessary 4.2 ETE Modeling

a. General information about the model should be provided Yes DYNEV II (Ver. 4.0.11.0). Section 1.3, Table and demonstrates its use in ETE studies. 13, Appendix B, Appendix C.

b. If a traffic simulation model is not used to conduct the ETE No Not applicable as a traffic simulation calculation, sufficient detail should be provided to validate model was used.

the analytical approach used. All criteria elements should have been met, as appropriate.

4.2.1 Traffic Simulation Model Input

a. Traffic simulation model assumptions and a representative Yes Appendices B and C describe the set of model inputs should be provided. simulation model assumptions and algorithms Table J2

b. A glossary of terms should be provided for the key Yes Appendix A performance measures and parameters used in the Tables C1, C2 analysis.

4.2.2 Traffic Simulation Model Output Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N15 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

a. A discussion regarding whether the traffic simulation Yes Appendix B model used must be in equilibration prior to calculating the ETE should be provided.

b. The minimum following model outputs should be provided Yes 1. Table J5.

to support review: 2. Table J3.

1. Total volume and percent by hour at each EPZ exit 3. Table J1.

node. 4. Table J3.

2. Network wide average travel time. 5. Figures J1 through J15 (one plot

3. Longest queue length for the 10 intersections with the for each scenario considered).

highest traffic volume. 6. Table J4. Network wide average

4. Total vehicles exiting the network. speed also provided in Table J3.

5. A plot that provides both the mobilization curve and evacuation curve identifying the cumulative percentage of evacuees who have mobilized and exited the EPZ.

6. Average speed for each major evacuation route that exits the EPZ.

c. Color coded roadway maps should be provided for various Yes Figures 73 through 78 times (i.e., at 2, 4, 6 hrs., etc.) during a full EPZ evacuation scenario, identifying areas where long queues exist including level of service (LOS) E and LOS F conditions, if they occur.

4.3 Evacuation Time Estimates for the General Public

a. The ETE should include the time to evacuate 90% and Yes Tables 71, 72 100% of the total permanent resident and transient population Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N16 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

b. The ETE for 100% of the general public should include all Yes Section 5.4 - truncating survey data to members of the general public. Any reductions or eliminate statistical outliers truncated data should be explained. Table 72 - 100th percentile ETE for general public

c. Tables should be provided for the 90 and 100 percent ETEs Yes Tables 73, 74 similar to Table 43, ETEs for Staged Evacuation Keyhole, of NUREG/CR7002.

d. ETEs should be provided for the 100 percent evacuation of Yes Section 8.4 special facilities, transit dependent, and school Tables 87 through 89 populations.

Tables 811 through 813 Tables 814 through 816 5.0 Other Considerations 5.1 Development of Traffic Control Plans

a. Information that responsible authorities have approved Yes Section 9, Appendix G the traffic control plan used in the analysis should be provided.

b. A discussion of adjustments or additions to the traffic Yes Appendix G control plan that affect the ETE should be provided.

5.2 Enhancements in Evacuation Time

a. The results of assessments for improvement of evacuation Yes Appendix M time should be provided.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N17 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

NRC Review Criteria Criterion Addressed Comments in ETE Analysis

b. A statement or discussion regarding presentation of Yes Results of the ETE study were formally enhancements to local authorities should be provided. presented to local authorities at the final project meeting. Recommended enhancements were discussed.

5.3 State and Local Review

a. A list of agencies contacted and the extent of interaction Yes Table 11 with these agencies should be discussed.

b. Information should be provided on any unresolved issues Yes A comment resolution form was created that may affect the ETE. and any issues were resolved.

5.4 Reviews and Updates

a. A discussion of when an updated ETE analysis is required Yes Appendix M, Section M.3 to be performed and submitted to the NRC.

5.5 Reception Centers and Congregate Care Center

a. A map of congregate care centers and reception centers Yes Figure 101 should be provided.

b. If return trips are required, assumptions used to estimate Yes Section 8.3 discusses a multiwave return times for buses should be provided. evacuation procedure. Figure 81

c. It should be clearly stated if it is assumed that passengers Yes Section 2.3 - Assumption 6h are left at the reception center and are taken by separate Section 10 buses to the congregate care center.

Technical Reviewer _______________________________ Date _________________________

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N18 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1

Supervisory Review _______________________________ Date _________________________

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant N19 KLD Engineering, P.C.

Evacuation Time Estimate Rev. 1